Please enjoy this free copy as my gift to you.

If you'd like to obtain a printed soft-

cover of this work by mail, or to make a donation towards it and future free works
like this one, please go to: (StrawmanStory.info) and follow the links.

1
— STRAWMAN —

The Real Story Of Your 

Artificial Person


A private work by: clint > richardson


—Volume I—














—=—

“He who learns must suffer


And even in our sleep pain that cannot forget

Falls drop by drop upon the heart…

And in our own despair, against our will,

Comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.”



–Agamemnon; Aeschylus

—=—


2
 —=—

Preface

—=—



This is not a published book…

It is not a product of or in any artful form of commerce, nor is it intended for such public right,
means, or ends. It carries neither a ÒÞctionÓ or Ònon-ÞctionÓ title. Rather, it is a 3-dimensional
explanation of both, and of that eternal battle between the spirit and the ßesh.

Remnants of the history of political activism, such as PaineÕs ÒAge of Reason,Ó BastiatÕs ÒThe Law,Ó
and the inceptive ÒAreopagiticaÓ by Milton, were all created in the form of what are known as
pamphlets. These were also not ÒpublishedÓ books per se, but statements of inert and often self-
evident reason with only as many words as are necessary to create a quite clear and empathetic
expression of oneÕs thoughts, printed sometimes anonymously and thus privately so as to be
distributable by a people seeking change in political and moral opinion and disposition. The
purpose of these pamphlets was to spread knowledge and often a quite dissenting comprehension
of current and foundational political views, customs, and norms, and to expose unseen legal
atrocities without the commercial intent to acquire personal gain from those works.



In other words, they were not ÒapprovedÓ or ÒwelcomedÓ by the combined powers of church and
state.

—=—

"Anonymous pamphlets, leaßets, brochures and even books have

played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups
and sects from time to time throughout history have been ABLE TO
CRITICIZE THE OPPRESSIVE PRACTICES AND LAWS EITHER
ANONYMOUSLY OR NOT AT ALL... It is plain that ANONYMITY
HAS SOMETIMES BEEN ASSUMED FOR THE MOST
CONSTRUCTIVE PURPOSES.Ó
ÑJustice Hugo L. Black, Supreme Court, Tally v. California, 1960

—=—


!3
 —=—

“An ‘anonymous work’ is a work on the copies or phonorecords of

which NO NATURAL PERSON IS IDENTIFIED AS AUTHOR.”
—U.S.Code, Title 17, Chapter 1, § 101

—=—

Anonymity is not a word describing that which is necessarily an unknown in Nature. In the
Þctional, legal law realm it merely describes the absence of political or public character (that of a
Þctional name as evidence of some class and legal status) attributed to a work. And so I, as the
exclusive author of this work, choose not to identify myself under any Þctional (legally) registered
name and/or persona of another for the purposes of this work, including any ÒnaturalÓ or
ÒartiÞcialÓ legal person, and instead choose to remain anonymous to all such Þctional realms. Let it
here be known but not registered in any way that this is so, and that the spirit of the name clint >
richardson bears no simulation, similitude, or any intentional or accidental sameness to any
proprietary legal Þction (person) in any legal realm of Þction (the false i-magi-nation and creation
of man) called as governments, while retaining the full and utter authority and negative protections
of privacy under the Highest Law of God. The use of this symbol (>) is portrayed for one and only
one purpose, which Þguratively is solely to signify the highest position of my Þrst name and will
(christian name) over any possible misconception or legal opinion that this nonlegal name
richardson has any supernatural (supra) and/or lawful powers, authorities, or any implied bond to
any legal jurisdiction either tacitly or expressly implied or expressed by its use. The name
richardson is not herewith used as any form of legal creation or admixture of Þction, is not intended
as either a cognomen or agnomen (names [nomen] derived from family [cog/com] or from any
event [ag/addition]), nor is it herein being used (employed) in reference to any legal agency or
principality or its property. It shouldnÕt be misconstrued through legal word trickery as any form of
proper noun, only as a private, nonlegal homage to the blood of my Real parents. These names,
remaining without admixture or legal attachment as any corporate or other form of personhood,
carry no legal rendering, weight, or suspension in any way as to my Self or to this work. To be
without any such legalized name is to be without such dependancies of the legal realm. To the
reader, the reasons behind these statements will become perfectly clear as we proceed, strange as
they may presently seem.

ANONYMOUS - adverb - [Latin anonymus; Gr. name. See Name.] NAMELESS; wanting a
name; WITHOUT THE REAL NAME OF THE AUTHOR; as, AN ANONYMOUS
PAMPHLET. (Webs1828)

ANON - adverb - 1. Quickly; WITHOUT INTERMISSION: soon; IMMEDIATELY. The same

is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it. Matthew 13:20. 2. Sometimes;
now and then; at other times; accompanied with ever, ever and anon. (Webs1828)

INTERMIT - verb transitive - [Latin intermitto; inter and mitto, to send.] To cause to cease for a
time; TO INTERRUPT; TO SUSPEND. Pray to the gods, to intermit the plagueÉ (Webs1828)

SUSPEND - verb transitive - [Latin suspendo; sub and pendo, TO HANG.] 1. To hang; to attach
to something above; as, to suspend a ball by a thread; to suspend the body by a cord or by
hooks; a needle suspended by a loadstone. 2. TO MAKE TO DEPEND ON. God hath
suspended the promise of eternal life on the condition of faith and obedience. 3. To interrupt;
TO INTERMIT; TO CAUSE TO CEASE (BE DEAD/EXTINCT) FOR A TIME. The guard nor
Þghts nor ßies; their fate so near At once suspends their courage and their fear. 4. To stay; to
delay; TO HINDER FROM PROCEEDING FOR A TIME. Suspend your indignation against
my brother. I suspend their doom. 5. TO HOLD IN A STATE UNDERMINED; AS, TO
SUSPEND ONE'S CHOICE OR OPINION. 6. TO DEBAR FROM ANY PRIVILEGE, from
the execution of an ofÞce, or from the enjoyment of income. Good men should not be

!4
 suspended from the exercise of their ministry and deprived of their livelihood for ceremonies
which are acknowledged indifferent. 7. To cause to cease for a time from operation or effect;
as, to suspend the habeas corpus act. (Webs1828) (Addition by author)

ANONYMOUS - Without name. This word is applied to such books, letters or papers, which
are published without the author's name. NO MAN IS BOUND TO PUBLISH HIS NAME
IN CONNEXION WITH A BOOK OR PAPER HE HAS PUBLISHED; but if the publication
is libelous, he is equally responsible AS IF HIS NAME WERE PUBLISHED. (Bouv1856)

ANONYMOUS - Nameless; wanting a name or names. A publication, withholding the

name of the author, is said to be anonymous. An anonymous letter is one that has no name
SIGNED. Cases are sometimes reported anonymously, i.e., without giving the names of the
parties. ABBREVIATED TO "ANON." An anonymous society in the Mexican code is one
WHICH HAS NO FIRM NAME AND IS DESIGNATED BY THE PARTICULAR
DESIGNATION OF THE OBJECT OF THE UNDERTAKING. (Black4)

AMBIGUITY - Doubtfulness; DOUBLENESS OF MEANING. DUPLICITY, INDISTINCT-

NESS, or uncertainty of meaning of an expression used in a written instrument. Want of
clearness or deÞniteness; difÞcult to comprehend or distinguish; of doubtful import. For
"Extrinsic Ambiguity," see that title. Ambiguity of language is to be DISTINGUISHED
FROM UNINTELLIGIBILITY AND INACCURACY, for words cannot be said to be
ambiguous unless their SIGNIFICATION seems doubtful and uncertain TO PERSONS OF
COMPETENT SKILL AND KNOWLEDGE TO UNDERSTAND THEM. It does not include
uncertainty arising from the use of peculiar words, or of common words in a peculiar sense.
It is latent where the language employed is clear and intelligible and suggests but a single
meaning, BUT SOME EXTRINSIC FACT OR EXTRANEOUS EVIDENCE CREATES A
NECESSITY FOR INTERPRETATION OR A CHOICE AMONG TWO OR MORE
POSSIBLE MEANINGS, as where a description apparently plain and unambiguous is shown
to Þt different pieces of PROPERTY. A patent ambiguity is that which appears ON THE
FACE of the instrument, and arises from the defective, obscure, or insensible language
used. (Black4)

AMBIGUITIES - Latin. From ambiguus, doubtful, uncertain, obscure. Ambiguity; uncertainty

of meaning. Ambiguitas latens, a latent ambiguity; ambiguitas patens, a patent ambiguity. See
Ambiguity. (Black4)

—=—

To put it as simply as possible, especially in the eyes of man’s so-called legal systems of law, the
more ambiguous a man is the more he is intrinsically and internally graced by God and protected
by GodÕs Law of Nature. To the artiÞcial law of man, ambiguity is the enemy. To Nature it is, well,
the Origin of all things, as nothing of the Real (in Nature) is ever born (Created) with a name.
Names are attached in the after-birth, and are purely a creation of man alone. Names cause things
to be legalized (re-created) as art. And all that is legalized is pretended to be property of its creator.

To be in namelessness (without respect of any legally attached/admixed surname) in legal terms is

to be part of the untainted Nature of GodÕs Creation (Reality). To be clear, the Þrst (christian) name
is property of God (of Nature/Truth) while the last (sur) name is property of the adversary (a lie).
When admixed, the combined or legal name is recorded in the legal artiÞce of governmentÕs tax
registers (the book of the dead). Do not dismiss this as religion, for it is the strict LAW!

There are millions of John Smiths standing as registered citizen-ships for example, but only one
Þctional, legally registered name (noun) that is ÒJOHN W. SMITHÓ is adjoined with the unique
identiÞcation tag of Social Security #123-45-6789 at a speciÞc federally registered municipal address
that is pre-tended to exist in the legal Þction and jurisdiction of the Þctional ÒUnited States.Ó And so
MR. SMITH is quite the opposite to any man that stands in ambiguity, as that which is only an

!5
untainted ÒCreationÓ of GodÕs Nature. With every Þctional, artiÞcial name, title, number, and mark
one may be legally permitted to have attached to this rented legal status of Òpersonhood,Ó the more
we cause our extrinsic and external identity (appearance) as a speciÞcally distinguishable legal
status to be known and recognizable to that legal realm and jurisdiction of the artiÞcial state. This is
to say that we step further outside of GodÕs Realm of Nature, of Reality, and crossover more and
more with each mark, token, and sign into the land of make-believe; the land of lost souls in the
realm of the spiritually dead. In other words, we become unrecognizable as our True Self, that is, as
Purely an Act of God. Our body, our temple, is corrupted by legal Þction, by artiÞce, which is merely
another term for sin.

Please note here at the beginning that the word ÒGodÓ and the King James Bible will be used
extensively throughout this work. Do not let this fact turn you away, for this work is equally critical
of organized religion as it is antagonistic of atheism. These institutions have nothing to do with the
meaning of this word God or the Bible, as will be shown in many ways, and are designed to deceive
and take away knowledge of the Law. While all of this will become perfectly clear, the reader must
understand that the Bible is not religion, it is the common Law. It is the very foundation of Law,
also called as the Natural Law. This is not the author's opinion, but stands as the record of the
courts as documented herein. For now, all we need to know without doubt to move on is that the
Highest possible substance of Law in all the so-called 1st world ÒChristian nationsÓ is the Bible,
and that It (what is called as GodÕs Law) defeats all other forms of Þctional law created by men. In
other words, what is legal is always opposed to what is that Natural Law. Fiction is always
opposed to Reality. And so the only way to study and comprehend the intent of the amoral/
immoral legal law is to compare it to the spiritual, moral Law of the Bible, which is higher in
Authority. This is not a ßight of fancy, it is the standard of Law. And one certainly needs no
corporate religion or temples built by freemason hands to follow the Law of GodÉ quite the
opposite, in fact. Clarity will be forthcoming.

The maxims of law are very clear on how ambiguity destroys legal certainty (lies accepted and
conÞrmed as legal facts or falsiÞed truths) in the Þctional realm. But we also Þnd that what is made
sure by any name can only be the property of the government that registers and deÞnes it.

—=—

“Whenever the language of stipulations is ambiguous , it is most Þtting

that that [sense] should be taken BY WHICH THE SUBJECT-MATTER
MAY BE PROTECTED.”
Ñ Quoties in stipulationibus ambigua oratio est, commodissimum est id accipi quo res de qua agitur in tuto sit. Dig. 45 1, 80. (Black1)

—=—

“When in the words there is no ambiguity, THEN NO EXPOSITION

CONTRARY TO THE WORDS IS TO BE MADE.”
ÑQuoties in verbis nulla est ambiguitas, ibi nulla expositio contra verba ßenda est. Go. Litt. 147. (Black1)

—=—

“Frequently where the PROPRIETY OF WORDS is attended to, THE

MEANING OF TRUTH IS LOST.”
ÑSaepenumero ubi proprietas verborem attenditur, sensus veritatis amittitur. 7 Co. 27. (Black4)

—=—

!6
 —=—

“Propriety of words is the SALVATION OF PROPERTY.”

—PROPRIETAS VERBORUM EST SALUS PROPIETATUM. Jenk. Cent. 16. (Black4)

—=—

Here, at the beginning, we must have understanding of these two opposing terms and how they
are used. For to understand our own plight as actors (agents) in the property (person) of the state
we must understand the origin and purpose of being legally registered by name at birth. The
difference between that which is ambiguous (unowned) and that which is proprietary (property of
something) is not only the very foundation of law but of how law effects (sanctions) all things in
Nature. And so we must comprehend that these names and other legalistic words are patented as
property by the governments that rule upon their value and de-liberate (make unfree and
unambiguous) their meanings. The words we choose to speak or write are what causes us to be
seen as either a thing in law or “no thing at all,” as the Bible instructs us to remain. The spiritual law
demands ambiguity, while the legal law demands and has artiÞcial ÒsalvationÓ through propriety
(ownership). Legal concepts are always opposed to scriptural Truths, for the idea of property being
as salvation is certainly antichrist. In other words, the legal language is the property of government,
and those who use it in persona may never claim ambiguity (spirituality). He who claims to be the
legal name (false creation) of another may not also claim to be a Creation of God (Reality/Nature),
and therefore cannot claim to retain or possess “God-given (Natural), unalienable rights” before the
proprietary legal master (administrative god) of that legal person (legal name and status). Only he
who has command of his own words (names) has command of his own mind, body, and soul.

This must be comprehended here and now, for this work is the very study of words and how they
are used to control us. If we stop and consider for a moment, we may suddenly realize that all
things legal, from the law to the corporations bound by it to the products they create as patented or
copyrighted works to the money used to purchase and sell them, are merely a collection of
registered, patented, and copyrighted words and other symbols on paper. What is Real is never
property. Thus, real estate is not Real, not Reality. Only the invented, patented name and title
standing in legalistic similitude of the Real substance of anything can be property of another legal
person. One can only own words. The Natural state of Being of all things is of course without
words. Even the species of man came before the words created by it. So which came Þrst, the man
or the name? The answer to this question is the very description meant by the word “Creation,” as
that which is not a re-creation of man. To this end, even the most staunch “atheist” may continue
with this work without questioning constantly the use of this phrase “God,” “Creator,” and “Word
of God,” in that the entirety of its intent is to establish the difference between what is Original
(Source) and what is a re-creation of that Original substance of Nature, as the legal simulation and
representation of things by their names (nouns). As we will see, this is the foundational principle of
scripture (Natural Law) and of man’s opposing legal systems and designs against it. And so the
author’s intent is not to cause anyone to believe in God, for not to believe in (Love) God is to not
believe in (Love) Existence (Truth). Nature is a self-evident Truth, undeniable and self-Existent, and
this is the very deÞnition of all that God (Jehovah) Is. Without It, man would not have Existence or
subsistence. Nature (Creation) is no man’s property, for It needs no words to establish Its
undeniable Existence as self-evident. Man may only own what he creates. Nature requires no
“proofs” of man’s imaginations or words to Exist. Only the names and titles placed upon what is of
GodÕs Creation (all of Nature, including man) need to be proven to legally (artiÞcially) exist as
Þctions of law. And only those legal names and titles can be legally controlled by legal laws. Legal
words as terms of art are certainly property, but nothing in Nature is ever property. Property, in
other words, does not Exist in Nature (Reality).

To be clear, no law of man ever applies to anything Real, only to the names and titles of what is
Real. To call anything legally as Òreal estateÓ does not make that thing anything but a ßattering title
(words on paper) to some Þctional person. Real estate is like a gold certiÞcate, re-presenting the

!7
Real as a Þctional token but holding no intrinsic substance thereof. It is not Real, only artiÞcially
“real.Ó We must always know in our hearts the difference between God's Nature (Reality) and legal
Þction. The word real in Þction can only ever mean that which is opposed to Reality, as that which
is an artiÞce of anything in the Reality of Nature (as a likeness, image, form, name, title, etc.), but is
never the actual substance of that which is called legally as ÒrealÓ (i.e. real estate, real name, real
party, etc.). A simple way to distinguish what is Reality and what is real (of realty/legal property) is
to remember that anything that is real to a person is never that which is Real to a man. Similarly,
what is real to a cartoon is to a man not Reality. Art is not Reality. There is nothing ÒrealÓ (legal/
unnatural) under Jehovah in Nature. There are no images, no titles, no names, and no parties. There
is only the Purity of what stands in Self-Existence.

Inversely, we must understand that the Law of God, as the moral and spiritual ÒunwrittenÓ or
ÒnegativeÓ Law of Nature, which Exists only in and over what is self-Existence (Creation), governs
only what is of Reality. Thus it is also called as following (religiously) the ÒNatural Law,Ó and
carries the same meaning as religiously following christÕs parabolic example, which is GodÕs Law
(of Nature) personiÞed into the story of a righteous man. For clarityÕs sake, to be a Natural Being or
to refer to anything as Truly of Nature is only ever a reference to that which has its own Real Source
or Force of Life and of Existence without manÕs designs and inventions. When the same term
“naturalÓ is used in a legal sense, as a Ònatural person,Ó this wordÕs source of existence is always as a
Þctional entity and its force is never that which is Life or True Spirit. To this end, we must always
remember that nothing in the legal realm should ever be mistaken as Reality, as a Creation of God.
And so the use of this word natural and all others can never be Trusted, because no Nature (Source)
Exists within any art form, any simulation, or any representation of anything Real. Government
cannot regulate or control Nature, only the names it claims as its own property. And that power
over the proprietary name requires the unwitting consent of all citizen-ships (subjects) so that the
Law and Laws of Nature may be pretended to be bypassed and replaced by the exploits of manÕs
legal law of the name, the law of legal persons and of nations. When man lives under the tyranny
of words (property), his connection to Nature and duty to protect It, including his own family, is
severed. To Live in Reality, to abandon the artiÞcialness of the legal matrix and follow only Nature
and Its Law, is a choice that requires continuous conscious thought and effort by men to uphold a
negative duty to all others at all times and without exception, whereas the opposing ÒpositiveÓ law
of man requires no moral thought or choice whatsoever, forcing us to continuously harm and in-
jure each other in the name of the law.

Legal law is also called as the Roman or Òstrict law.Ó Its structure and wording simply cannot
happen Naturally, and must be enforced by agents (ofÞcers) created by it under the color of a legal,
artiÞcial ofÞce, called also as ÒÞctions of law.Ó One Law comes Naturally (unwritten) and self-
evidently to the mind of every man, as Love and Charity in their Purest substance and action,
while the other must be forced upon the mind of each man. Its pretended existence is and can only
be as an artiÞcial creation of man. Its object is only towards the commercial existence and support
of artiÞcially created persons, places, and things. It is only when these two realms are caused to
appear to blend seamlessly in the minds of men, that of the Highest Law of Reality (God) and of
the legalistic laws in the Þction of false magistrate gods, that man and all of Nature becomes
helplessly enslaved to those few proprietors of words, controlling all that Exists through legally
assigned and enforced names and titles.

Property, no matter what we may call it, is only ever made up of words. We often call these words
as a ÒtitleÓ to land or other property, and ÒkingsÓ and other gods claim mastery and property over
their estates (en-title-ments) by similarly ßattering titles and descriptive words. A title (noun) is a
word or series of words carrying a legal name, and what is legal is never an act of God. In law this
simply means that a title never comes from Nature, being not a part of GodÕs Original Creation of
Nature but of manÕs artiÞcial designs and re-creations placed imaginarily over It. Property is purely
an invention of man, for all of Nature in Its ambiguous (unnamed) Purity belongs to God (Its
Creator), and thus to all of man in Perfect Equity under that Highest authority and Law. This is not
merely some empty religious sentiment, but the very foundation of reason and law. In other words,
governments recognize and have established the Bible as being the absolute Source and

!8
foundational principles of law, and so do everything in their power to steer us away from
comprehending the original intent of the words of the Bible as Law. All of their legal charms and
magical spellings of title mean nothing when the Bible is followed, when man acts christ-like under
the Highest Law of God. This is not religion, this is the law every reader in citizenship reading this
work is voluntarily under. And this will all be proven in triplicate as we proceed. The unwritten,
spiritual and moral Law of God's Nature (the Law of Real things) may only be defeated by
artiÞcial, legal considerations of that which is Real, and these are most often created by some
proprietary words that make up titles, existing only as the legally recorded, conÞrmed, and ratiÞed
imaginations of men. In other words, they are lies forcibly believed to be legal truths. Legal law is a
lie to govern lies, and can be nothing else. No Real Truth, nothing self-evident Exists in the legal
realm of Þction, and so like the word nature, the word truth cannot be trusted. For truth is but a
proprietary word used to describe every lie created in the courts and legislators of the legal realm.
What is truth to a cartoon or legal Þction (person) is never a Truth in Reality. For lies are not merely
created by legal means, they are patented, published, and enforced as the legal (adversarial)
version of truth.

It is a grave (spiritually dead) mistake to be-lieve (be in love) that one's name is one's own property,
and to be proud of such vain Þctions. As will be discussed in detail herein, one's name takes upon
itself only one of two considerations in law. A name either belongs to God or it belongs to the
artiÞcial, legal realm of the governments of men and its false, legal gods. The name and title a man
claims describes and positively establishes his intent and law, be it the Law of God or the law of
legal persons (mammon). And so it is under-stood that, as far as the “legal name,” the christian or
Þrst name belongs to God (Creator of Nature) and the sur or last name belongs to the legal state
(creator of Þction). According to law, the attachment and acceptance of what is last cancels the
power and authority of what is Þrst (Source). A last name, therefore, is legally considered as
evidence of the last will and testament (intention) of any man. To act in the proprietary legal
surname and title of another (to act in legal persona) is opposed to Living Purely and without mark
and blemish under God in Nature. And most importantly, no man may carry any legal title without
it being attached to such a legal ÒlastÓ name. One is always titled in ßattery upon their already
Þctional surname, for titles do not Exist in Reality and cannot be attached to christian (Þrst) names
alone, for legal persons and ßattering titles are absolutely forbidden by the Bible (Natural Law).
Only when this foundational, unwritten Law of the Bible is broken may the legal realm ßourish in
its lies and deceits, claiming all names and titles of persons, places, and things (nouns) to be its own
by its written legal law. This is not the author's opinion, this is how the governments of men are
structured and work. There is no room for disagreement here, for we are not speaking of religion.
We are only seeking the Truth of things, not whether those things are good or bad or appeasing to
our own egocentric world view. And what Is quite often is not what we wish or desire vainly for it
to be.

And so, while this work certainly carries a series of descriptive words, it has no title because it has
no legally surnamed author, both of which can only be artiÞcial creations and property of
government. If the reader wishes to call this work as the unofÞcial, unregistered, ambiguously
enlarged words describing this work on its cover, so be it, as long as no misconstruction of these
words is ever used in any legal fashion. This private work has no such marks, styles, titles, or other
proprietary designation in any legalistic form.

TITLE - The radical meaning of this word appears to be that of A MARK, STYLE, OR
DESIGNATION; a distinctive appellation; THE NAME BY WHICH ANYTHING IS
KNOWN. Thus, in the law of persons, a title is an appellation (name) of dignity or
distinction, A NAME DENOTING THE SOCIAL RANK OF THE PERSON BEARING IT; as
"duke" or "count." So, in legislation, the title of a statute is the heading or preliminary part,
furnishing the name by which the act is individually known. It is usually preÞxed to the
statute in the form of a brief summary of its contents; as "An act for the prevention of gaming."
Again, the title of a patent is the short description of the invention, which is copied in the
letters patent from the inventor's petition; e. g., "a new and improved method of drying and
preparing malt." The title of a book, or any literary composition, is its name; that is, the

!9
 heading or caption preÞxed to it, and disclosing the distinctive appellation by which it is to
be known. This usually comprises a brief description of its subject-matter and the name of its
author. "Title" is also used as the name of one of the subdivisions employed in many literary
works, standing intermediate between the divisions denoted by the term "books" or "parts,"
and those designated as "chapters" and "sections." (Black4)

PROPRIETE - The French law term corresponding to our "PROPERTY," or the right of
enjoying and of disposing of things in the most ABSOLUTE manner, SUBJECT only to the
laws. (Black4)

PROPRIEDAD - In Spanish law. PROPERTY. (Black4)

PROPRIETY - In Massachusetts colonial ordinance of 1741 is nearly, if not precisely,

equivalent to PROPERTY. In old English law. Property; propriety in action; propriety in
possession; mixed propriety. (Black4)

PROPRIETARY - noun - A proprietor or owner; one who has the EXCLUSIVE TITLE TO A
THING; one who possesses or holds the title to a thing IN HIS OWN RIGHT. The grantees
of Pennsylvania and Maryland AND THEIR HEIRS were called the PROPRIETARIES of
those provinces. Webster. - adjective - Belonging to ownership; belonging or pertaining to a
proprietor; relating to a certain owner or proprietor.

PROPRIETARY DUTIES - Those duties of a MUNICIPALITY which are NOT

GOVERNMENTAL duties.

PROPRIETARY GOVERNMENTS - This expression is used by Blackstone to denote

governments granted out by the crown to individuals, in the nature of FEUDATORY
PRINCIPALITIES, with inferior regalities and subordinate powers of legislation such
as formerly belonged to the owners of counties palatine.

PROPRIETARY RIGHTS - Those rights which an owner of property has by virtue of his
ownership. When proprietary rights are opposed to acquired rights, such as
EASEMENTS, FRANCHISES, etc., they are more often called "NATURAL
RIGHTS." (Black4)

PROPRIETAS - Latin. In the civil and old English law. PROPERTY; that which is one's own;
ownership.

PROPRIETAS PLENA - Full property, including NOT ONLY THE TITLE, BUT THE
USUFRUCT, OR EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO THE USE.

PROPRIETAS NUDA - Naked or mere property or ownership; THE MERE TITLE,

SEPARATE FROM THE USUFRUCT. (Black4)

PROPRIETOR - One who has the LEGAL RIGHT or EXCLUSIVE TITLE to anything. In
many instances it is synonymous with owner. A PERSON ENTITLED to a trade-mark or a
design under the acts for the REGISTRATION OR PATENTING of trade-marks and designs
is called "proprietor" of the trade-mark or design. (Black4)

—=—

You must ask yourselfÉ who has the legal right to deÞne legal terms? Who deliberates and projects
ofÞcial opinions upon the legal words and terms of the legal art? And as merely the end user of
these proprietary words of another creator, are you speaking in ambiguity or as a slave to the
owner of those words?

!10
Who is the owner of your registered, legal name? What does the legal word “child” mean when it
is used to describe a legal persona (a legal status of man but not man)? And therefore, who owns as
property the person of every “child” in every nation? Why can the courts of legal law take away
the “child” from its “parents” at will?

The answer to these questions cannot be found in Nature. The answer stems only from the power
and respect of the authority of those who own (hold) the words we use. To respect words (form)
over the Reality (substance) for which they re-present is the foundation of all lies, of all control, and
of all sin. For the state never kidnaps a Real child, only the legal persona of that child, which it
proprietarily titles as a legal “child.” The legal child is not Real. It is only when man cannot
differentiate between what is an ambiguous term of Nature and what is an arbitrary term of legal
propriety (property) in false persona that his power is stolen from him through word-trickery. It is
only when a man accepts the legal Þction title of ÒfatherÓ and ÒmotherÓ over that of the Reality and
bloodline that these words re-present in the Reality of Nature that man can be unwittingly caused
to abandon his only Real property (child) to the legal Þction nation (state). For any Real child
registered as a legal Þction ÒchildÓ and thus attached with a surname, number, address, and other
signs and marks of artiÞcial quality and character are only considered in manÕs legal law as that
which is opposed to God and Nature (Natural Law), as that which is voluntarily abandoned to the
state. A “child,” in other words, is only a legal creation of the state, the word being merely a
proprietary legal term of art belonging to the state. And the “father” of the “child” is only they that
founded that state (corporation). For the legal state, as the districts of the many nations, is the
property of a private People. And in every nation, only the terms of speciÞcally proprietary legal
art are recognized. He who uses a person (legal status) of any nation is bound to know that
language, and as we have all heard, ignorance of law is no excuse.

But how can we understand “the law” if we do not understand the patented, proprietary legal
terminology (legalese) that makes up that law? Inversely, how can we understand the Bible
scriptures as the Highest Law if we do not understand the ancient roots of the non-English
language structures that it was intended to be understood by?

You see, it is in the best interest of the king to translate the terms of law, both legal and scriptural,
into a form that is virtually impossible to decipher. Power comes only from the secrets held by
those in power. And as it turns out, all secrets are held only by keeping man ignorant of the True
meaning and intent of the words that make up the law. All secrets are also made up only of words,
including the secretive, hidden meanings of all ciphered symbols. In Truth, in Reality, there are no
secrets, for the Truth of all things is self-evident and self-existent. In Þction though, the greatest
secret is that all words are lies. To hold the title to all words as legal, corporate property is the
essence of power. Without this property in words there can be no strict law, for ambiguity kills
propriety just as legality Þguratively kills Nature (connection to Source).

—=—

“The proprieties of words [proper meanings of words] are to be

preserved or adhered to.”
—PROPRIETATES VERBORUM SERVANDAE SUNT. Maxim of law. (Black4)

—=—

ManÕs law cannot exist without owning as property its own artful terms, just as a painting (art)
cannot exist without its paint. A person (a Þctional, legal status in “third person”) is quite the
opposite of the True, Natural Self (acting as Self, only in Þrst person), and is a Þctional identity
designed to cause the man for which it is legally assigned, registered, and attached to be
intentionally unambiguous; to stand as a uniquely recognizable or patently novel invention of man
designed speciÞcally to clearly identify all things in Nature by patented, Þctional names and titles

!11
(nouns). In other words, it artiÞcially protects man against his own actions by pretending to put the
blame on a Þctional strawman. You might say that this is the pretended action of personiÞcation or
anthropomorphizing of the straw man argument Ñ the bringing to artiÞcial life a logical fallacy
artfully designed to place blame and responsibility for oneÕs own actions where none can actually
Exist. It is the puppet-master blaming the otherwise inanimate puppet for the actions of the master
through it. In short, respect of any manÕs person-hood as a false id-entity is simply an avoidance of
the Laws of Nature. It is an abandonment of the Word (Law) of God; of personal responsibility. It is
acceptance of false creation (the lies/satanism). And most importantly, it causes man to become the
property (slave) of that government which proprietarily holds that strawman, a legally registered
and incorporated proper name/noun (recreation) that can only be used by men if we submit to its
creator gods in a legal bond and surety.

Until a man is bestowed a status (legal persona) as a virtual vessel or ship, including name, titles,
numbers, and other signs and marks of the legal Þction, his Nature (Self-Existence, self-evidence) is
one that is unknown as an active simulation within that legal matrix. Man alone cannot be re-
cognized as a Þctional person birthed in legal fact, for man is simply too ambiguous (not deÞned or
speciÞc enough) to be recognized by legal means, terms of art, and jurisdictions. A man is of blood;
a person is of words. To use a movie reference, the ambiguous man is not plugged-in to the legal
matrix, for he has no digital (Þctional) character that exists in that Þctional realm. A legal personÕs
existence is only ever virtual, false, artiÞcial, and therefore can only appear in and as a Þctional
construct. If the person (strawman) were a visible mark such explanations would be unnecessary,
for we would grasp visually each manÕs person and therefore his artiÞcial status, for he would
wear it on his sleeve or as a mark of his beast-hood on his body, perhaps upon his forehead or
wrist. But this mark is purely a mental one, the strawman itself invisible but for the artful words
upon paper and the digital contracts and sealed certiÞcates that make its pretended existence up
(make-believe). The strawman may only be known and expressed Þrstly through the belief (love of)
Þction, secondly by the express conÞrmation and thus veriÞcation (non-avoidance) of that legal id-
entity, and thirdly by consent and voluntary agreement to the terms of the implied contractual
relationship (imaginary social contract) and binding law under the proprietary public system that
governs (controls) that legal person (status). In other words, the rules of the Matrix only apply to
those plugged-in to one of its avatars.

For reference and for better comprehension of the Bible story as a whole, this is the same ambiguity
that Jesus the christ held, called by over 50 descriptive, parabolic names and titles therein but never
by any speciÞc surname (state property) of Caesar. Jesus carried no legal burden, no registered
legal ÒlastÓ name of the state. And to be clear, the word christ is not a name or surname (noun), but
a description (adjective) of oneÕs state of Being and actions (verb), which when properly translated
means Òthe anointed.Ó More on this laterÉ

As for this private work currently in your hands, let it be known and evidenced here that no matter
what form itÕs in, I hereby claim it permanently to be in ambiguity. That is to say it shall be held
proprietarily by no person of any type, including all governments, and that I am the only man of
God with proprietary, negative rights to it under GodÕs Highest Law. Therefore, you see, it is to be
known here that this work is the property of all men in the Purity of equitableness under the
Natural Law and must by that Highest Law remain always as such. No man may proÞt or gain
from Its Existence nor claim it as their own through any Þction or false persona, and it may never
be caused to be artfully transmuted into any legal Þction or registered title. It is not bound by any
of manÕs legal laws, all of which are but temporary inventions under the permanence and authority
of GodÕs Highest Law (Word). And so while no man or person may sell this work in any way, all
men may privately and Charitably give it freely to all others in gift.

The Natural Law protects only the ambiguous man (male and female) in his Natural, private, and
charitable state of Being (verb) only until such a legal persona (noun/status) is artiÞcially (as an art
form) attached to his innocent Nature. It is through this incorporation that his good Þrst name is
consensually bedeviled and thus tainted in mammon (valuation in money) with an attached
Þctional last name. ManÕs loss of spiritual Life happens in law when that legal (full) name is acted

!12
upon and thus conÞrmed, meaning that we begin identifying and signing in that id-entityÕs name
while utilizing its legal beneÞts and licenses. Once a beneÞt is received, the man is thus bound by
the law of that property he used to obtain the beneÞt, e.g., the legal person (commercial vessel).
Without a legal name (noun), all things in Reality are in their Natural state of Being, as Purely
ambiguous and not recognizable by any supposed legal authorities as property of any man, person,
place or thing (noun/name). All of what Exists Naturally (in Nature) as Creation and without the
legal, patented designs and inventions of manÕs recreation stand (as Source/in foundation) without
identiÞcation. To hold an id-entity some Real thing must be simulated in law as a Þctional thing. It
must be placed and re-purposed into some legal system, a matrix of coded, proprietary words. In
other words, it must be named (placed in noun form) and recognized ofÞcially and legally by that
artful name (term of art) by all who use and behold it. It must be pre-tended to be turned into a
legal entity; to be id-entiÞed as a Þctional, legal person or thing. Its Life (Reality) must be hidden
and covered by spiritual death (registered legal identity).

Id + entity = legal + person (status).

ENTITY - noun - [Low Latin entitas.] Being; EXISTENCE. Fortune is no real entity. 1. A REAL
being, or SPECIES of being. (Webs1828)

Ñ=Ñ

An artiÞcial speciesÉ this is the effect (covering) of a person-hood. So too is ÒcattleÓ and Ògame.Ó
We are acting as men of straw in a Þctional (dead) existence. We are portrayers of Life as art.

The legal (false) id-entity is reinforced by constructing and stroking the ego, which is created in
each of us through public education and entertainments that cause each man to id-entify his True
Self as that which is false, as the person (id-entity) and thus property of another. And so our True
Existence has been turned from Real (singular, ambiguous, and without Þction) into an imaginary
legal class, sort, kind, or species (speciality) of property (some-thing special, in appearance only, as
that which is only for show). A person (status), like fortune, is no Real entity. It is only form without
substance; an animal, Þctional life without a soul.

The question that seems to really bake everyoneÕs noodle out there is whether or not existence
Exists? Does Þction really Exist? Strangely enough, though the answer may seem obvious, this
question will be repeatedly addressed as we move forward. To Be and remain Free from that which
is artiÞcial, from that artful existence and authority of manÕs imaginations and designs of legal
Þction, we must always and at every moment be aware of these two parallel existences, which are
always diametrically opposed to each other. This is what is referred to as Living in a spiritual Life
or Existence; a total awareness uninterrupted by false considerations. What is Real and what is
artiÞcial cannot exist together without being forced and enforced by the will and acceptance of
men. To accept and consent to Þction as evidence of the artiÞcial self (strawman/third person)
causes the Real Self (Þrst person) to be hidden behind the Þction, which is the root cause of all that
ails us. In this way, the artful existence of Þction becomes imaginarily (legally) self-evident, for it is
attached only to that artiÞcial, legal self we pretend to be. At this point, the law of persons over-
comes the Law of Nature, and manÕs actions are no longer guided by spiritual, scriptural Law.
Choice is destroyed, and thus moral choice is outlawed. For a person (status) in any form within a
legal society is only allowed to follow the legal code of that legal matrix, the re-created false law of
its legal gods (creators). When legal words (names) are respected as strict law, GodÕs Word (Law) is
lost, and the blood of man is Þguratively replaced with the word-code of personhood.

After all, even a virtual reality such as The Matrix seems Real enough to the senses. And for we who
are born into and made to believe in (love) such a Þctional structure, we have nothing to compare it
to. We know not what Life Is without it or outside of its imaginary jurisdiction. We have no idea
what Natural Freedom is! One birthed into the artiÞcial world of this legal matrix knows no other
way, no other law, and no other way to Exist. For we are publicly kept away from the scriptural
knowledge and Natural Law in every way possible while still given the choice to use and Live by it

!13
by law. In fact, it is this choice alone, this election, that legitimizes the entire fraud. For without
choice, without volunteerism, the law would be simple and tyrannically directed. Confusion and
illiteracy of language ensures consent without comprehension, as the maxims (principles) of law
and contract allow. Ignorance, especially when voluntary, is the crown jewel of any ruler over his
multitude.

The main component in the battle between good and evil is to know at all times what is Real and
what is false, and to never worship or hold sacred that which is of the artiÞcial world created by
men via the many forms of art, idols, images, symbols, words, or numbers we have been habitually
made accustomed to believe in (love) and follow. This is the True, self-evident knowledge revealed
by the Bible. And as simplistic as this may sound, one has to ask one's Self why each of us has
fallen prey to such a Þctional existence as that of this strawman id-entity we all carry around with us
every day in our wallets and purses, and on our cell-phones and other devices, feeling virtually
naked without it. Why are we acting falsely under the authority of Þctional characters with
Þctional titles in a Þctional government with Þctional laws over only its own Þctional persons? The
answer to this can only be found when the Þctional, legal matrix code of law can be seen for what it
is: the big lie. And the path to under-standing this True knowledge is to be found in scripture, but
only for those with eyes to see and ears to hear, for those who can see through that matrix of words
to feel and know deeply and with total empathy the Reality they falsely re-present, and only for
those not blinded by their own love or hate of organized, corporate religion. For the organized,
corporate religions of the world have absolutely nothing at all to do with the intent of the Bible,
standing quite opposed to Its Word (Law).

What is Real Exists only in Nature without Þctionally id-entifying names, titles, and marks (as
worldly, unspiritual blemishes), including the Self-Existence of each man, and is in fact un-sure and
thus unable to be in-sured against. Only sure and legally (artiÞcially) provable, ÒCertiÞed,Ó and
registered names of Þctional persons, places, and things (nouns) can appear and be under-stood in
any Þctional place (name/noun) of ÒjurisdictionÓ by any agent of the legal Þction (as a municipal
corporation, such as a legally incorporated city, county, state, country, district, and/or nation). That
which creates the words of the legal language art through registered names, letters patent, and
other artful means is therefore the controller of all those created legal names (nouns). And he who
acts in and uses those names and other terms of art as property of another are controlled by the
laws attached to the use of those legal names and other legal words. This is called the law of
persons. To have a legal status (persona) within any government is to be bound by the law of that
status (person). All legal persons, places, and things (proprietary nouns) are strictly unambiguous
and thus unmistakably identiÞable, but only as long as the man in Þrst person can be made to
believe that he or she is in-deed that Þctional id-entity in third person and not one's own Real Self
Existing only in Nature and Its Law. Blood and blood alone makes the private man, while artiÞcial,
legal identity alone makes the public person (status) of man. Man cannot protect himself from the
big legal lie and law that is the legal realm if he participates in its rented property of legal persona
(legal status), for the person is the plug into that legal matrix. God’s unalienable Law applies only
to God’s Creation, not to man’s art and legal persons. A person cannot claim any law but the law of
man, the law of persons. To rent the property of another requires a strict, forcibly sanctioned
adherence and consent to the law of the owner of that rented property; just as a slave owes fealty to
his master. This is the ancient battle between Reality and Þction; or, as some may choose to refer to
it, that eternal war between God (Reality) and satan (artiÞce). Surprisingly, through years of deep
study, I was astonished to Þnd that this is exactly what the Bible is about. We are engaged in a
battle of Reality vs. artiÞce, nothing more and nothing less.

—=—

ÒSo also is the RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. It is sown in

corruption; IT IS RAISED IN INCORRUPTION: It is sown in
dishonour; IT IS RAISED IN GLORY: it is sown in weakness; IT IS

!14
RAISED IN POWER: IT IS SOWN A NATURAL BODY; IT IS RAISED
A SPIRITUAL BODY. THERE IS A NATURAL BODY, AND THERE IS
A SPIRITUAL BODY.”
—1 Corinthians 15:42-44, KJB

—=—

This continuous referential to being raised from the dead has nothing to do with the actuality of
one’s physical death. In law, being considered as dead is the key to a legal life. Death is simply a
false life (existence/entity) lived in the big legal lie of Þction (strong delusion) without respect of
God’s Nature (self-evident Truth). Its rebirth from death (from life lived under legal law and
sanction) is a metaphor for returning to Nature and Its Law, for abandoning artiÞce (sin) and
returning to Reality (Truth), and for utilizing through our actions (force of Life) exclusively the Law
and utter authority of God’s Nature (Reality). In order to walk only upon this righteous path, we
are given the perfect example to follow as the story of a man standing perfectly under the Natural
Law, the allegorical story of Jesus christ.

There are but two realms upon this Earth, one of God in a Natural State of spiritual Life and Self-
Existence and the other of a lower, legal state of Þction in a spiritual death, also called as a civil
life. What is civil is always artiÞcial. What is artiÞcial must be recreated and renamed into what is a
legal identity so as to artfully exist. For what is legal but that which is by its design opposed to
Reality, to Nature, to God, and to Life Itself? This legal state of the pretended death of the spirit in
false persona is also called legally as citizenship, which is why United States citizen-ships are called
as “natural persons” in law, and not spiritual persons. In fact, it would be an oxymoron for a man's
“person” to be called as “spiritual,” for only that which is Truly Living can be said to have a spirit
of God, of Reality, and of Nature. Persons are always of Þction, not Reality. When the word Nature
or Natural is recreated and renamed into their legal equivalents (similitudes), as that which is
opposed to the Real thing, then that which is legally called (styled) as “natural” can only ever be
that which is an artiÞcial re-presentation thereof, and therefore quite the opposite of what is Truly
of (belonging to) Nature (God). This is the way of Þctional things, of civil, legal, artiÞcial (dead)
existence, the evidence of which being more than conclusively shown herein to satisfy even the most
ardent skeptic, if he or she should dare to challenge the power of their own ego so as to Þnish this
work and discover the nature of this false, devilish id-entity, also known as the strawman. For the
spirit is of Life, not death. It is not an after-life, except to say that every man may rise from such a
dead pledge (mort-gage) in the false persona (artiÞcial status) of this delusional, legal existence.

—=—

“One thing have I desired of the LORD, that will I seek after; THAT I
MAY DWELL IN THE HOUSE OF THE LORD ALL THE DAYS OF MY
LIFE…”
—Psalms 27:4, KJB

—=—

“Who is made, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the
power of AN ENDLESS LIFE… For those priests were made WITHOUT
AN OATH… And they truly were many priests, BECAUSE THEY WERE
NOT SUFFERED TO CONTINUE BY REASON OF DEATH: 


!15
 BUT THIS MAN, BECAUSE HE CONTINUETH EVER, hath an
UNCHANGEABLE priesthood.”
—Hebrews 7:16, KJB

—=—

An oath causes death, for an oath is always to another god. And oath is thus spiritual death. To
dwell in the house of the LORD (translated as Jehovah) means to Live only in the self-evident
Reality of Nature and Its Law, and no other. This, as we will discover, is what is translated as
“endless Life.” Endless Life is not a result of physical death, but of spiritual awakening from
knowledge in this Life, to be reborn from spiritual death (i.e., citizenship) back into Life under the
spiritual, Natural Law, as the embracing of ambiguity over property. To celebrate the “birth day” of
our strawman, for instance, is to celebrate a civil, artiÞcial creation and its pretended legal existence
in third person; the Þctional life of a legal id-entity. But a spiritual man of God has no end and no
beginning in Life, being timeless, priceless, and ambiguous from that celebrated Roman (pagan)
calendar system of timelines and pretended histories of genealogies, being instead merely a
humble, self-evident part of God’s Nature (Creation) as all other Creatures and parts thereof.

It may surprise the reader to discover that the word “afterlife” or any variation thereof is not
written anywhere in the Bible. It may also be a surprise that the only actual concept of a “life after
death” comes not from the notion of a physical death of the human body at all, or as the end of
Natural Life itself, but that such an attainment of a Natural, spiritual Life after death is only
accomplished by those who wake up from the big lie that is legal Þction and embrace Reality and
Its Law. A registered (taxed) citizen or member of any Þctional or municipal corporation is a dead
form of existence. It is the state and status (personiÞcation) of a Godless, spiritually void life. It is a
parasitic existence that cannot subsist without a host, without belief, and without being attached to
that which is Real. In other words, Þction can only exist in the minds of men: if no man (Life) can be
found, no Þctional copy or simulation of life (art) may thus exist or have being (artiÞcial life).
Demons may only exist by being imagined and manifested through manÕs belief (love) in artiÞcial
life. Belief in lies, in artiÞcial persons, places, and things (nouns) and the artiÞcial (legal) laws that
control them, is a state of being (entity) that exists only in spiritual death, while a spiritual Life lived
eternally (at all times) is the only cure for such a legal dis-ease as this. True Life only Exists in
Nature, and can be found nowhere in Þction. Fiction is always temporary, always dependent on
Reality to artfully exist, is never eternal, never endless; for that which is eternal is only ever that
which is Self-evident and Self-Existent. Reality needs no proof of man for Its ambiguously eternal
(unchangeable), harmonious Existence. That which is legal is that which is opposed to the essence,
force, Source, and soul of Life. Thus a legal existence can only be lived in the realm of “hell” where
the spiritually dead have their domain. Only through the overcoming of any perceived validity and
authority of the many artfully ÒcreatedÓ marks and signs of Þctional person-hood, of being thus
Þguratively Òborn againÓ from a civil, artiÞcial life (false existence) and into the innocence of our
Natural and Original state of conscious Being (as we are all Originally born into God’s Nature),
may we break free of the bonds and surety of this legal matrix code which controls every Þctional
realm of strawman id-entity. The loss of all Þction, in other words, is the gaining of eternal Life,
whereas the gaining of Þctional status and things is a spiritual death, a loss of True Life. There is no
Life after death in this regard, for the death continuously spoken of in the Bible is exclusively
referential to the legal Þction, with eternal Life found only through the abandonment of all legal
marks that cause us to live under the delusion of a spiritual death in legal Þction. It is the key to the
knowledge of Truth, and it prevents us from virtual necromancy, from breathing artiÞcial life into
dead persons, places, and things (nouns/names).

Though it is a strange concept at Þrst, one of the most spiritual realizations we may come to is that
the Word (Law) of God contains no words at all, and is simply the Purest and most harmonious
Life possible in respect of the Law and Laws of Nature (Jehovah) that any man may lead without
obstruction. This follows exactly with the Natural Law example for all men to lead as personiÞed

!16
into the allegorical story of christ in scripture. The Bible, when correctly read, is nothing more and
nothing less than this: an instruction manual for the untainted (eternal), christ-like, spiritual Life of
every man.

—=—

“Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
EXCEPT A MAN BE BORN AGAIN, HE CANNOT SEE THE
KINGDOM OF GOD… Marvel not that I said unto thee, YE MUST BE
BORN AGAIN.”
—John 3:3, 7 KJB

—=—

“BEING BORN AGAIN, not of corruptible seed, but of

INCORRUPTIBLE, BY THE WORD OF GOD, WHICH LIVETH AND
ABIDETH FOR EVER.”
—1 Peter 1:23, KJB

—=—

The Laws (the Word) that causes balance to the harmony of Nature cannot be defeated by the
designs of men, for the Law (Word) is the very foundation of the Life and Existence of men. These
“Laws” are not created by man and do not Exist because they may be found in any written form,
just as the letters and patterns created by computers that map DNA are not the actual Reality of the
Essence and Source of that DNA in Nature. The Law of Nature Exists with or without man, and
with or without man’s words. These Laws are not visible or recordable in such a vulgar construct
as the English language, being wholly self-Existent and self-Evident even despite man’s artful
interpretations of what is the Source and permanent Nature of Life. Thus I cannot show you the
Law (Word) as art in any form, I can only refer you to the exempliÞed story of the Law as told in
scriptural teachings. The Law and Laws of Nature are of the Pure Substance of the very Existence
Life Itself, heard in the heartbeat and seen in the beauty of all that harmoniously Exists as the
unwritten self-evidence of all of Nature. And as for the vulgar concept of the sanctions or strict
punishments of God, the consequences of not following in harmony with the Word (Law) of God’s
Nature is already manifest in our modern societies — not in some ethereal punishment from
beyond, but in the self-evident and self-existent pain, suffering, and destruction of Life all around
us, including that of our own disease-ridden bodies. To blame God for the results of our own
actions despite ourselves in purposeful ignorance and idolatry against God’s Law (Word) of
Nature, the permanent instruction manual for Life, is patently ridiculous.

The Kingdom of God (Jehovah) is all around you. It’s called by most men as Reality, Nature, the
Universe, or some combination thereof. Its Being is the air we breathe and the water we drink. But
It, along with ourselves in Its Oneness, need no such names or titles ascribed by men to Self-Exist.
To Þnd Jehovah is to embrace It by Its Truth and Spirit, not by empty names assigned to It by
idolatrous men that seek to own parts of It as the gods of their own proprietary claim and patented
invention. To be “born again” by the Word (Law), this is eternal Life on Earth. Life unblemished
and without artiÞce, this is Heaven on Earth, separate from the worldly things re-created by man.
For eternity is in the blood (Source) of man and the passing of Its Life Force (as the Fountain and
Essence of Life). It is the reason we all Exist today, and it is why we should be proud of our fathers
and cherish the future of our own multitude and continued generations (Creation) of children. To
not believe in It as self-evident is to believe Existence somehow doesn’t Exist; a fools errand at best

!17
and a legal, ecclesiastical god’s wet dream to be sure. The only way to respect this Source of all Life
(Jehovah) that manifests in our own blood is to ensure our children are never birthed and thus
conformationally enslaved into the artiÞcial law as we have been, and to teach the Word (Law) of
Nature’s God as the only viable future we may Exist in. For if Nature (Source) fails, so too does
man under Its dependence, and with us all the entirety of this false, legal system we hold so
sacredly (as a curse upon us) will crumble into the nothingness from which it was imagined.

Is this religion? No, this is Law. It is the only Truth. And Its Law must be followed religiously
through our actions under It. Organized religion and its gods must die so that God’s Law of Nature
may Live in and be expressed by each man. For to know the Word (Law/Son) is not merely to
recognize the vulgar words of men used to describe and deÞne it. To know It is to Love It, to feel It,
and thus to be a Part (Creature) of It. When It is in pain, so too must you be. If It is damaged by
man’s designs against it beyond reparation, so too must man cease to Exist amongst Its ruination.

The Word of God is the Law of God, and the Law of God is personiÞed as (told as the story of) the
Son of God. In other words, the path to following the Law of God (Nature’s Design) is expressed by
the parabolic actions of Jesus christ. To follow the actions of christ is to follow the Law (Word) of
God. To act according to christÕs teachings and example is to act according to the Word of God in
harmony with the Design (Creation) of Nature like an instruction manual, for the Son is the Word
and the Word is the Highest, self-evident Law of spiritual Existence. The confusion and hatred for
the wordless Word of God as the self-evident Truth of Reality stems only from the purposefully
mistranslated words chosen by those artiÞcers and transliterators of the King (false god of the
Crown). To hate the Word of God (which needs no words of man at all to be known by men), and
thus by default to hate the Son of God (the anthropomorphized story of that Perfect Law and how
it should be Lived by all men), is in actuality to be in a state of hatred (not believing in, not loving,
nurturing, and protecting) all of Nature and Its Law. This is a strange concept, and merely means
that one loves Þction (lies) more than Reality (Truth) as one's make-believe law. Proof of this hatred
is found in the love and mark of legal Þction through legal person-hood; the mark of beast-hood
signifying servitude to the false legal creator gods of the big lie. To hate God is to hate Reality,
meaning the hatred of that which Exists without man’s designs, imaginations, and the artful lies
that make up the language of his Þctional laws over the Þctional identities and personiÞcations of
all of GodÕs Creation standing spiritually and eternally in self-Existence. It is to allow the slow
destruction of Nature so as to make room for technology and commerce in artiÞcial creations of
man instead of protecting Nature against such designs against it at all costs. Like the movie re-
presentation, even the legal matrix in its visualization is only a projection of coded language (art),
being made up entirely of words just as is every legal person (artiÞcial status) is a contracted,
termed dis-ease. There is nothing of Reality (of God) to be found within any person. One either
believes in (loves) Reality (God) or one adversarially believes in (loves) legal Þction and prays
(pleads) within that big lie only to its false gods (judges/magistrates). Man can only have one
master, and only the Truth will ever set him free.

That which is and those who act not of GodÕs Nature of ÒCreationÓ (in self-Existence) and by
NatureÕs self-evident Law cannot see or Þnd Heaven, as that which is GodÕs Kingdom of Reality.
For Jehovah is nothing if not the Eternity of the Existence of all Life that is all around us right now,
as that which is and has been and always will be. It is a system of Life passed on from generation to
generation by the blood inheritance and Source of all Creation, not as some imaginary realm that
can only be obtained by words spoken to priests and popes (false gods) after our physical death
from this only True substance of Existence. The Bible is written for Living Life, not for waiting to
die. To contemplate the Law of scripture without also contemplating the Oneness of all Life Itself is
perhaps the most ridiculous aspect of organized religion, and yet absolutely essential to its control
over the minds of men, leading us towards such a spiritual death in legal id-entities. To cause man
to ignore GodÕs Word in the only place it matters and applies to (Nature) and instead to believe that
only the Þctional and non-scriptural ÒafterlifeÓ matters, is the perfection of legal, artful, satanic
(adversarial to Life) thought. Again, no “afterlife” such as presented by the legal, corporate church
and state can be found in scripture, though the translated words of the king may easily be confused




!18
and misconstrued as such. And thatÕs the point, for Truth is not only stranger than Þction, Þction is
a stranger to Truth. A person is a stranger to man. And he who is surety to a stranger will smart for it
(Proverbs 11:15).

A legal person has only a false existence as a civil “lifeÓ form in a Þctional place without substance
called as a legal jurisdiction (noun), but never in God’s Realm (verb) of Reality, and has no sense of
sight. Heaven is unobtainable to men acting in and as Þctional persons. Heaven requires us to be
tuned in to Its Design, to the harmony of all senses by our True Self without non-sense (artiÞce)
without being led astray by the false promises of the greatest of liars. Persons are purely of art,
created by artful means as representations of what is Real, and by their false nature have no sense
at all. They are not in self-existence, pure nonsense, needing a master to operate them as a puppet
needs strings. They are made of straw, or more accurately, of words on paper. They are what every
man is artiÞcially reputed to be, as one's reputation, but never the actual substance (Source) of any
man. They are created strictly by the unnatural nonsense and imaginations of men and religiously
embraced by the believers (lovers) of artful words over the Reality of what those words actually re-
present. What is of the artiÞce, what is dead and in evidence only through a legal existence, simply
cannot Exist as a self-evident Truth in GodÕs Kingdom of Nature. And so we must realize that any
thing which needs or seeks proof is always false. To this end, we must know that all legal laws
need to be proven to falsely exist in some Þctional jurisdiction (place) and pretended to be attached
to some Real man or other Real aspect of self-Existence as the name (noun) of a person or thing. My
purpose here is not to prove God to anyone, for only a fool denies what is Right in front of his face,
what Þlls his senses and warms his soul. I am only here to reveal that legally established proof is
never a property of the God (Creation) of Nature, and that what is Real needs no proof of Its
Existence as artiÞcial things do.

But what is ÒGodÓ anyway?

Unfortunately, there is no easy or complete answer to that question, for it is simply the wrong
question and always has been. One who spiritually comprehends and under-stands (stands under
the authority of) God would never ask such a question, and one who doesnÕt comprehend and
under-stand can never Þnd the answer through such an inquiry directed at persons and authorities
(ßattering legal titles) that are not Creations of God. Jehovah is not a what, not a who, not a where,
when, or why. What is a noun (name), and is the same single-word concept as the Latin adverb why
(because). A who is always a false, artiÞcially created identity, not a self-Existence. Where signiÞes
some place or jurisdiction, based on such artiÞce like the Roman calendar, that is not of Nature
(God), which is all Real things and all Real places. And Þnally we have when, which has no Real
meaning in Nature as it Exists now. For the concept of time and its recording is purely a treatment
of man, requiring as well these other qualities to be recorded as who, what, why, and where
happened at that time (when). God is timeless, nameless, placeless, priceless, and has no id-entity or
ego to carry it. What is Real requires no such attributes, such artful creations of men. What is
spiritual holds nor requires any of these descriptions and names (nouns). God, in other words,
cannot be limited to the conceptuality's and imaginations of manÕs imagery and language arts. Of
course, wars are generally started by such disagreements in the contexts of art, as some misspelled
or mistranslated word sparks unconscionable actions and licensed murder.

At some point, we must accept in True Faith that we are part of this unknowable Life Force, a
Source that cannot be deÞned and that must be faithfully and religiously Loved and Worshiped
above all else. And It must be our only Law, the highest Law, which forbids all lies and Þctions of
law. This is to say that no man may possibly have a complete knowledge of what Is God (Source).
The part can never contain the actual entirety of the substance and complete essence of the whole.
This is another self-evident Truth. Any man who does claim such a totality of knowledge so as to
proprietarily (speciÞcally) deÞne ÒGodÓ as anything but that unfathomable Essence of all Existence
is most certainly a psychopathÉ or perhaps just a victim or leader of the doctrines of organized
religions and cults. It is an unanswerable question. And sometimes men are driven mad by such
riddles, mistaking logic limited by language with unwritten, spiritual knowledge. Ultimately, this
knowledge and under-standing (standing under the authority) of such unknowable knowledge

!19
and the acceptance of its Self-Existence in that State of unknownness as to the Design of Eternity
and the Source (Force) of Life is the Þrst great leap of True knowledge. It is the acceptance and
spiritual recognition of a negative state of Being in all things, a comprehension and Life Lived
under the Golden Rule that a negative simply cannot be proven; that Life It-Self cannot be
positively proven; that Reality cannot be positively proven. And so ÒGodÓ Its Self cannot be
positively proven. It is only lies and Þctions of law, the names of false persons, places, and things
(nouns) that must be proven to exist as conÞrmed and ratiÞed lies. And their false, artful existence
must absolutely encompass a description of exactly (under strict, written law) who, what, where,
when, and why that artiÞcial (legal) person, place, or thing exists. This strange concept of the
adversarial opposition of the Real from Þction and lies must be at all times known and acted upon
as Law in spiritual communion with the Oneness of God (Reality), for the Source of all Self-
Existence is undeniable to the senses; to the mind, body, and soul. This is the greatest Secret of all
the ages, the Great Mystery of the Oneness (God) that unveils all other secrets and mystery
religions of men as frauds. For no thing can be kept secret when it is merely the Truth of Everything
in Its negative and ambiguous State of self-Existent Truth. Actual Truth, in other words, needs no
jurisdictions or other artiÞcially created positive law realm to Exist in, for It is the Source of all
other Existence, Real or false. The lies of men cannot exist without man’s essential and foundational
Source of Life, which is also the Source of his imaginations and designs against his very own
Oneness with that Source. To be ruled by sacred (cursed) mysteries that when revealed show only
the empty forms of languages, symbology, imagery, and the organized criminals that keep them
sacredly misunderstood by their captive multitudes is the way of such societies of the secret. They
are the false source of all governments (mind control) around the world. They hide the True Nature
of God as Jehovah under the veil of word-magic, confusion, and imagery, obfuscating not ÒGodÓ

(that Reality which cannot be hidden), but instead manÕs ability to commune with his own True
Nature and place within GodÕs Nature, substituting not only lies for Truth but promoting a
language designed to cause illiteracy to the public-minded masses under their spell.

The hardest realization to come by is that there are as well no lies in Reality, that lies as well do not
Exist in Nature, and that lies need menÕs imaginations to cause them to take shape and form in the
mind in order to effect Reality by turning men into the controlled puppets of those lies. Many
prominent and respected lies are made into law and into religions, and are thus styled (entitled) as
one institution of empty ÒfaithÓ or another, of history-based doctrines and principles (artiÞcial
foundations) with not one ounce of self-evident Truth. Faith, of course, is just another word for
Trust and Love (be-lief), and there is no prerequisite for most men to have such faith in other men’s
lies, though the Bible clearly warns against putting such faith (trust) in other men and their
systems, and especially in their laws of false doctrine. But these warnings are fervently and
apparently willfully ignored, as the majority of people have been publicly conditioned to have faith
in money and in other Þctions and outright lies, even over such eternally self-evident wisdom and
unwritten knowledge as what Exists in self-evidence all around them.

—=—

“A lie can travel halfway around the world 


while the truth is putting on its shoes.”
–Mark Twain

—=—

This work, for instance, doesnÕt attempt to deÞne ÒGod.Ó For the Only True, unchangeable, and
indefatigable God of Nature is just Þne the way It Is, in Pure self-Evidence and self-Existence,
ambiguous in every way. Thus nothing can explain It better than the untouched Nature around us
as we commune with It and feed on Its Clean and Pure Energy as the Source of Life. ÒThe ancient
oracles were ambiguous as were their answers,Ó claims Webster in his 1828 deÞnition of ambiguous.
So too was christ in much of his parabolic retort, he that never spoke in any legal (artiÞcial)

!20
certainty that can only manifest as the arrogant opinions of men, and instead only in the certainty
of spiritual things of the self-Existence of Reality. The reader should not confuse this work as
anything but a discussion about this spiritually knowable (negative) Truth, while cross-referencing
such unshakable knowledge with what are the unknowable perturbations of that Source of Truth
caused by the words (false, proprietary, legal truths) of men. The litmus test on the Truth of this
work is what my own words make you feel about what is Truth, and thus what is and is not of God
(Reality). The goal of this work is to cause the reader to look beyond the words used herein, to see,
hear, feel, and touch the Source of all things in order to differentiate between what is Real and what
is a lie of Þction told by men, to move past the empty names (nouns) assigned by men to all things
and to respect the Source of Existence and the Force of Life over any possible word used to describe
It. And so I seek not to deÞne in empty words that this Source is ÒGodÓ but instead simply to reveal
that Source as it already Exists despite our descriptions and vain beliefs about It. And to do this, we
must learn to know and recognize at all times exactly which of manÕs lies (Þctions) stand in our
way and bar us from our very own Source, from our True God, and we must no longer be afraid to
speak with eloquence and Authority to the false gods of legal things and systems, for without our
own God (Source) we will continue to fall prey to that fountainhead of lies and the legal, artiÞcial
gods that control (govern) it. We must destroy all persons by Living only in our own True Self. We
must obliterate the power of all places but that Reality of Source (Land) upon which our feet may
actually tread. And we must retire all things until all that remains is the original Design of Nature in
self-Existence under Its own Natural Laws. Only at that point can man Þnd True Peace, for his for-
proÞt wars are only ever over the lies and artiÞce of false legal and ecclesiastical doctrines over the
commerce of Þction and imagined legal property in mammon. Our True battle is only ever a
spiritual one, and blood (Source) should never be spilled or even a blade of grass burnt or crushed
for the false legality of these gods (creators) of nations. No man should die standing against Nature
on behalf of Þction. No war should be fought over a worshiped and sacred (cursed) lie, no matter
how real its perceived matrix may seem to be. Ironically, if self-evidence and self-existence were the
evidential requirements for all wars to be waged (a commercial bet or wager based on the
prescribed, imagined outcome), all states (conditions) of war would or should thereby be subverted
by the very Truth of their fraudulent reasons to exist in the Þrst place.

This work, being based upon this great and always unhidden Mystery of the only True knowledge,
does not Exist because it has a name or title, nor does its Existence depend upon man’s registration
and copyright schemes or some bestial mark or bar-code in the corner. Its text is not meant to
replace or prove Nature and Its Law but to reveal It as already and obviously self-existent, as that
which was here long before us and long after, and hopefully with our own blood relations within
It. For man may only Òliveth and abideth for everÓ in his True, untainted substance of Nature, by
his blood that is passed on in eternity as the inheritance of Life Itself. The forms we pre-tend to
legally (artfully) exist within steal that substance and power from us, the power of God (as the
voluntary actions and works of True religion), placing our consciousness and actions in support
only of legal Þction even at the expense of Nature, of this Heaven on Earth that is Reality, and of
our place within It. To Live for ever is to have eternal Life on this Earth unbroken by artiÞcial things,
free from the Þgurative fruit of the tree of knowledge of Þctional concepts and ideals (evil) against
God’s Nature (good). For you see, to Live for ever is to worship ever. It is to Live for God’s Nature
and not against It. Ever is not a place, It is Truth, it is everything in Nature that Exists because of Its
Self, because of that which came before It and which will come after it with no End and no
Beginning, the very Force of all Life and Existence. No one man actually Exists forever. But all men
are part of the Ever until we foolishly destroy that which makes our own bloodlines spring with
Eternal Life with every new generation. This act of pro-creation is merely one aspect in the
permanent Design of Creation (Jehovah). Our blood belongs to God’s Nature, not to kings and
magistrates pretending to be gods over their own genealogy of Þctional persons in manÕs created
histories. Blood is not of the vulgar concept and description of who, what, where, when, or why.
Blood is the quintessential Source and foundational to Life Itself, a product of God’s Creation, the
very Source and Force of our collective Being, and thus cannot be measured by Þctional means.
And yet that is exactly the goal of the legal nations of the world, to cause each man’s blood as the
consideration and Source of all his God-given, Natural Rights to be tainted, blemished, caused to
be condemned, and thus by law Þguratively (legally) corrupted by the legal process of citizenship

!21
(felony) in voluntary attainder. While this legal processing of man in persona will be covered
thoroughly within this work, the reader should bear in mind while continuing herein that the
entirety of the authority of all legal law is based on pretending that our individual blood, and
therefore our entire ancestral family’s bloodline of inheritance, is corrupt. For it is only through this
legal trickery of the artful corruption of blood (the Source of our own self-Existence and Lawful,
unalienable authority under God) at law that has allowed these devil’s advocates in suits and ties
to steal everything we have ever had. This work is the story of just how that pirate cove was set up
and the language it uses to deceive and steal all things by naming all things as its own property.
For all public citizens, all strawmen, are but ship-mates (agents/employees) on their captains
(principals) sea vessel. And we have even been conditioned to steal (pirate) from each other in a
competitive monopoly game using only promises to pay (the dollar and other national Þat paper
currencies) that have no value whatsoever but that which is believed in (loved) by those being
robbed through it, over and over, until Þnally we Þnd that nothing is left of our estates but govern-
ment owned and registered (taxed) property, including even our very id-entities and that of our
children. All of this balances upon the legal fact of the event of birth attainder, the licensed crime of
a pretended corruption of blood, as a mass delusion of magic-spelling covering the multitude of the
common goyim of nations.

And so let us be very clear here… the word Ever, like Existence and like Truth, is a verb. Ever is
happening right now and will continue to happen whether you like it or not. One can choose to
Live with IT in worship and in Peaceful Harmony with Its Laws, or one can act adversarial to Its
purpose, which in the end, is in fact one's own purpose, which is to sustain our Life Force. It is
what has happened and what will happen with absolutely no comprehendible way to measure
such timelessness. One simply cannot encompass what is Ever, for It has no possible known ending
and no comprehendible beginning. This is spiritual knowledge of the unknowable. This is Faith
and Life in Jehovah. It is a foundational understanding that some things are not meant to be or are
even possible to be known, and yet they are held to be certainties and sacred just the same. It is to
breathe in the air despite the inability to see, touch, feel, hear, or witness it, and to treat and protect
that intangible Creation of God through Faith in Its self-evident Existence as part of the whole
Oneness of God. It is the knowledge that to pollute or harm any part of the whole is a sin against
the whole.

Some people might state Þguratively that they live for chocolate. Others may claim to live for
weekends. But there is no True Force of Life in these statements. These are addictions, not
foundations.

A man of God Lives for Ever, to serve and protect Ever, because he knows and acknowledges as his
moral, “religiously” followed Law that he cannot Exist without (outside of) Ever and neither can
his children or their children. To taint Nature is to taint one's Self, to defeat one's own immortal
procreative purpose. Therefore one respects the Law and harmonious Design of that which is
Creation to protect and continue to Exist and subsist for Ever, worshiping the very Design and Law
of Nature, God’s Law, this being the best description I know of to humbly say what God and a
Truly Religious man Is in his actions and works. God is Eternity (Ever), and therefore man must
strive to Live in Eternity (Heaven) while Being exclusively for (in support of) that Eternity, having
True Faith (Trust) only in Its Self-Existence and Self-evident Truth, for his very future generations of
his own eternal Life depends on Its religiously protected wellbeing and harmony. To be part of
Eternity man must worship It as a whole (monotheism), not in parts (polytheism) but rather as the
One True God. For without the whole, the single part is useless. And so the main objective of
commercial governments is to cause men to become useless, to spend their labor (time) construct-
ing that which is useless or opposed to Nature in pursuit of reward in mammon (worthless script).
The useless man is the easiest man to be made into a slave. And so the use of every public person
as an employee (agent) and thus the man standing in bond and surety to that Þctional creation of
law must commercially acquire a permissive diploma and licensure to be useful to the nation and
its private landholders. To employ anything is to use that thing. Thus, to employ a man’s person is
to use that man for slave-labor, paying his person in mammon and allowing his person to spend
that company script (money) only in approved, licensed, stock-owned corporations and businesses

!22
of the state. This is the story of most men bound in personhood, and obviously is the opposite of
living for Ever. It is a spiritually dead existence, based on the purely temporary and destructive
designs of men. But of course, many of these strawman still take and insist upon carrying the
empty, ßattering title of a legal ÒChristianÓ straight out of Caesars Rome.

It is this state of consciousness untainted by the world of Þction that is what it means to be born
again through christ. It is not a ceremony or a dip in the holy water of some priest’s chlorinated
kiddy pool, it is to act according to God’s Son (Word/Law) of Nature and no other. It is to bind
one's Self only in and under the Law of Nature (The Word) without surety to any stranger or
respect of any Þction.

In the Bible, the origin of this word born, from StrongÕs Concordance #G1080 - gennaō - is intended
as a metaphoric refers to and is intended to deÞne ÒGod making men HIS SONS through faith in
Christ's work.Ó In other words, the original intent of the Bible says that acting christ-like and
Living for (on behalf of) Ever (Eternal Existence/called as ÒJehovahÓ)
as ÒJehovahÓ)causes each
causes individual
each man
individual
to
manLiveto Eternally within
Live Eternally GodÕsGodÕs
within timeless Nature,
timeless which
Nature, signiÞes
which the total
signiÞes abandonment
the total of allof all
abandonment
Þctions and artiÞce, and represents the killing of that legal strawman as a false-identity. It is to
worship christ in one’s Self, not as an external entity or man, and certainly not as the pope or other
proclaimed vicars (replacements) of christ. It is the worship and upholding of the Law (Son) of
God, not the empty name or image of the Law (Son). This is to be Òborn againÓ into Nature, a
metaphorical notion referring to the conscious effort by any and every man to Live Truly without
lies, in only the Reality of GodÕs Creation of Nature with minimal interference, and thus only under
the self-evident, unwritten Law of Nature. The word eternal does not refer to any external world or
realm in some ethereal ÒafterlifeÓ located outside of GodÕs Creation of Nature, but to a Pure and
unblemished name, mind, body, and soul in this One. Eternity has no end and no beginning, and
man is merely a temporary part of that eternal Existence, coming and going in an unending chain
of Life through inheritable blood and by the passing on of the True knowledge of good (Reality)
and evil (artiÞce) and the opposing laws that bind those realms. And yet man is unable to have
such eternal Life in the Ever without that Whole system of Nature and self-Existence that some call
as ÒGod.Ó And therefore every man should, even for the most petty reasons of self-interest, hold
ÒGodÓ Highest above all things. His very Life and Existence depends on It and only then does he
hold his own True best-interests (his Source of Life) above all other things.

—=—

“But as many as received him, to them gave he power TO BECOME

THE SONS OF GOD, even to them that believe on his name: WHICH
WERE BORN, NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE FLESH,
nor of the will of man, but of God. AND THE WORD WAS MADE
FLESH, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of
the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth.”
—John 1: 12-14, KJB

—=—

The Word was made ßeshÉ

The Son is the Word, the Word is the Law, and the Law is personiÞed And exempliÞed in the story
of the Son. And he who follows the Son (Word/Law) becomes as well the son of God. The son of
God is immune from and higher than all other gods and systems of man’s law.

Son = Word = Law.

!23
This permanent, self-Existent Law of Nature (not of man) is called as God’s self-evident Word. It is
the Son of God, the Light of True wisdom, or more accurately, wisdom only of what is self-Existent,
self-evident Truth. It is the opposite of darkness, of ignorance, and of useless information and
technology (art) steeped in Þction, which also pretends to be and even appears as the artiÞcial light
(lucifer) of false knowledge of artiÞcial things. GodÕs Word is again said to be the unwritten and
spiritual Law, for that which is self-evident needs no artful re-presentation by manÕs imagination
and re-creation. It needs no signs, symbols, numbers, names, or titles to Exist. It is not made of
man’s words. Its self-Existence is Its Highest evidence, as the very Self-evidence of the Nature and
Source of Reality. ScientiÞcally, Its proof can only be known by Its destruction or deconstruction,
which must necessarily also be the destruction of man and all of Its other parts. It Exists despite
words and therefore so do each of us, for GodÕs Word is merely the undeniable Truth of all in
Existence, a scriptural expression that refers to the Natural Design of all Life and True Existence of
all things Real, as opposed to all of man’s artful recreations and designs against It. Nature is not a
Creation of words (art), nor is It in any way dependent upon man’s created words (art) or contracts
to Exist and thrive, for this Ultimate Word (verb) of God is descriptive only of the Oneness and
Truth of all Existence, and is said to be the One True (monotheistic) God. It is spoken of in the Bible
by the sacred name Jehovah (YHWH) as what Is all of this boundless Eternity of unending self-
Existence that tickles our curiosities and imaginations, a tickle never-to-be satisÞed by the vain
inventions and sciences and physics of mens artful ways. If this one word, this particular and
ancient name bothers you, you are totally missing the point! The word (form) is never the sub-
stance. The name “Jehovah” is representative of the harmony and glue holding all things together
in their Pure substance of self-Existence without names or other artiÞce or empty forms, the
fountain and foundation of Existence without the laws made by men. The name man places upon
such a vast perception of knowledge of Eternity should not cause others to deny or war over Its
True meaning, for we cannot solve any of our collective problems unless we come together under a
collective foundation, namely one undeniable and self-evident. Jehovah is simply Nature un-
touched by man, and it includes man (as part of Nature) when man is untouched by Þction and the
lies he creates. It is the foundational Law of Existence, a Law not created by man but in timeless
Existence despite manÕs designs and imaginations. Words can only attempt to describe It, but It is
certainly not made of words. It is the Word, the Living Essence and Structure of all things. God’s
Word is not a language, but the structure and Law (Design) of Life Itself, and this Law must be
respected and preserved at all costs. It rules over the literate and the illiterate without distinguish-
ing such ßattering titles. ManÕs words and doctrines cannot ever capture Its essence, for It is not of
man, man is of It. It requires unfettered, spiritual reason, untainted by manÕs own designs. It is
undeniably present in all that breathes, in all that Lives and Truly Exists.

It is self-evident that Nature, by necessity, Existed before man was born into It. Thus man is a guest
of Mother Nature, mere visitors in GodÕs dwelling house. Whatever man sees Þt to call this heaven,
his words can never replace that Reality, and so we must never worship our own creation (words)
over the Reality they represent. And as for words that have no semblance to Nature, chances are
they are even worse. The problem is, through words the common man is contracted and made to
curse his own Nature, to despise Its Law, and to act adversarially against It. For if he can be made
to hate the word ÒGod,Ó then he can be made to hate his own Reality.

To again use the movie reference, once one sees The Matrix for what it is, a complete and utter lie,
then one does not with any sanity continue to argue over what color one of its rooms may be
Þctionally painted. Likewise, once I saw and felt what is the self-evident Truth of all things, I could
no longer argue over legal concepts like what is Òlawful money,Ó for I can win any argument by
simply invoking GodÕs Law, which tells me not to respect such artiÞce, and to call all money as
exactly what it is: a tool of mammon that carries a valuation that does not Exist in Reality. No man
may ever defeat me by his use of words again, for I judge not his words but what, if anything Real,
his words are being attached to. For I no longer see the world through eyes of straw.

And so we must realize that the scriptures are in their essence a personiÞcation of that unwritten
Law (Word) told in a parabolic story form. The Word (Law) of God is told by men as the story of
Jesus christ and through other parables. And it is christÕs actions, not merely his words, that men

!24
must follow. The words (Þction) may only ever describe what is Real, but never can words be
Reality. They can, however, show us what will happen if we stray from our eternal Life towards
spiritual death in Þction. They may only re-present Truth, but can never Be Truth. Truth (verb) may
be called as the Word of God, but the Word of God is not made of manÕs words. The Truth of
Reality is never that which is art, for art is never self-evident and self-existent, only a recreation of
man. ManÕs law is only his own created terms of art. Man alone creates art, not God, and not any
other Life form on this planet. Truth is said to be as that which Exists despite manÕs attempts to
deÞne and name it. And so when words are respected legally (with artiÞcial authority) over the
very Substance and Essence they describe, including especially artful, legal names and the digits of
numbers and other symbology, GodÕs Kingdom of Nature is hidden from man in illusion, a strong
delusion, as the magic (illusion) of the authority of words conquers our perceptions of Reality and
causes our actions to be cursed (held sacred above the Reality those words re-present). To worship
any symbol, any simulation over that which it re-presents is the epitome of sin. We act therefore not
in support of Nature but against Its Perfection of Design. We Exist without harmony towards that
which sustains our very Existence. This is madness. This is the legal way.

As we delve deeper into the study of the ancient origin and True intent of the words of the Bible as
compared to the opposing legal law as the words of the art of Þction, the readerÕs foundational
principle should be to always seek this self-evidence in every word that is presented. One must feel
every word and be cautious of the intent of those that cannot be felt. The Truth may only be found
Therein, never in the proprieties (property) of men. Truth may never be found in language, in art,
and yet the inheritance of knowledge requires such language arts to be passed along. This can and
should be the only spiritually useful purpose of language. When teaching our children and our-
selves, the artiÞcial nature of language must at all times be remembered. Ask yourself what is Real
and what is art, artiÞce, artiÞcial, technology; as what is Real (a Creation of) Nature and what is a
re-creation of man.

Do not let these ÒreligiousÓ sounding words get in the way of understanding their True Intent, for
the artful authority of the church and state requires our collective ignorance of these words through
the artful doctrines they create. The church may only simulate God by its doctrinal words (false
law), but these artful terms should never be confused as the self-evident, Living Word (verb) of
God. There is no comparison of the Bible and of any of manÕs incorporated religions (artiÞcial
persons), for the words of the Bible are parabolically told, self-evident Truths guiding man away
from such artiÞcial persons (corporations) as the legalized and licensed church and state. The Real
Church is only ever a Real group of Law-abiding People, never a government-licensed 501
corporation or building made by the masonic hands of men. The True religion (in action) of any
People is only expressed individually by men through their own actions, never through the empty
words called as any ßatteringly titled Òreligion,Ó and the Word of God should only be received in
Its intention to invoke such spiritual, moral actions and works. For just as God is not a word,
neither is religion. Religion in its True sense (as a verb, oneÕs action or works) is only ever how any
single man acts according to the Word (Law) of God. When religion is made into an artiÞcial person
(corporation) it is no longer Real, no longer Natural, and no longer of the Word (Law/Son) of God.
Religion may only Truly be expressed by man, never by manÕs artiÞcial person (strawman) and
ßattering titles as a ÒmemberÓ of any corporation calling itself legally (unnaturally) a state-
sanctioned ÒreligionÓ or Òchurch.Ó One either acts in Truth (Reality) at all times or he worships lies
created through words, holding the value of the name (word) as higher than the Source itÕs
imaginarily attached to. GodÕs ÒWordÓ is the very blueprint of Life, undeniable to any who may
discover just what this ÒWordÓ actually Is and impossible to overcome through Þctional, imaginary
means. For the ultimate Truth is that God's Word is no word at all.

The Word (Law) of God is timeless, while what is a creation of man is only ever temporary. The
Word of God is a harmonic frequency and resonance. It is without pollution and needs no solution.
It is the Perfection of Being of all things without interference from manÕs desires and designs
against it. It cannot be improved. It is the very cycle of Life, dependent on its own self-Existent
Design in ways man can never come to fully understand, and on a level he may never comprehend
even Exists. It respects not and claims no need at all for anything of the Þctions and inventions of

!25
man, all of which hold a destructive, aleatory, hazardous (speculative, of chance) intent and effect
towards It. The words (nouns/names) of man destroy the Word (self-Existence) of God by re-
placing Reality with a Þctional re-presentation of It. And while it is certainly a self-evident Truth
that words cannot in any way harm God’s Nature, the effect that words have on man’s conscious
intent can certainly cause manÕs mind to be governed by such artiÞce, and therefore cause man to
become God’s enemy and antagonistic destroyer.

Ever notice that there are no years listed anywhere in the Bible; no historical timeline? Fools over
the ages have attempted to map the Biblical story of timeless, spiritual Law with the Roman
calendar, adding the ages of Biblical characters together and mathematically attempting to equate
them with some Þctional year Ò0.Ó Does no one pause to consider that this is not a history book?
Has a history book ever been written without years and dates? Does GodÕs Word, the Law of
Nature, in any way need to be classiÞed by the vulgarity of a man-made calendric, linear timeline?
Does the sun shine because of manÕs clockworks? Do the tides ebb and ßow because of manÕs
almanacs and records of the moon? Does what man calls as time pass only because man’s precision
instruments and clocks say it does? Is man the god of Time, of Existence? Does Existence Exist
because of or despite manÕs meticulous teaming and racking of its Existence and passing? The self-
evident answers to these questions is the same, spiritual understanding that allows every man to
know GodÕs Word (Law) without even the knowledge of the words and languages of manÕs
invention. For God’s Word (Law) is simply not made of the words of any man. What is self-evident
and self-Existent needs no re-presentation of its Truth or its Nature. The parabolic warnings of the
scriptures are certainly no exception, even as the story of the folly and fall of every single man Þnds
its home within.

The bottom line is that the Bible does not Þt into the limitations of the physical sciences. One cannot
put the Word of God into any of manÕs chronological Þctions. What is timeless does not Þt into a
timeline. How does one possibly measure what God is, and who but the most psychotic of men
would venture to claim it as possible?

CHRONOLOGY - noun - THE SCIENCE OF TIME; THE METHOD OF MEASURING, or

computing time by regular divisions or periods, according to the revolutions of the sun, or
moon; of ascertaining the true periods or years when past events or transactions took place;
and arranging them in their proper order according to their dates. If history without
chronology is dark and confused; chronology without history is dry and insipid. (Webs1828)

CHRONICLER - noun - A writer of a chronicle; A RECORDER OF EVENTS IN THE

ORDER OF TIME; a historian. (Webs1828)

CHRONICLE - noun - [See CHRONIC.] 1. A historical account of facts or events disposed in

the order of time. It is nearly synonymous with annals. In general, this species of writing is
more strictly conÞned to chronological order, and is less diffuse than the form of writing
called history. 2. In a more general sense, A HISTORY. 3. THAT WHICH CONTAINS
HISTORY. Europe - her very ruins tell the history of times gone by, and every moldering stone
is a chronicle. 4. Chronicles, plural, Two books of the Old Testament. - verb transitive - To
record in history, or chronicle; to record; to register. (Webs1828)

CHRONIC, CHRONICAL - adjective - Continuing a long time, AS A DISEASE. A chronic

disease is one which is inveterate or of long continuance, in distinction from an acute disease,
which speedily terminates. (Webs1828)

—=—

That government agency, which legally records and issues birth certiÞcates, is a chronicler; a
recorder; an event historian. And all history (his story) is indeed naught but the Þction of the
chronicler. The history of every public person begins with recording of the birth event. The pre-
tended life of a Þctional person (legal status) is always based in the time domain, never in the

!26
timelessness of God’s Nature. Legal persons (masks) are strictly the creation of man, never of God,
and are never a result of any Natural process. To be perfectly clear, we must realize that Jehovah
has no history. Nature is not bound by history in any way for Its Existence, Its continuous Being,
for what is that permanence of Jehovah contains within all that Is, Was, and Shall Be, which might
be styled as the histories recorded by man, as the apologetic chronicles of all things vain and
temporary. That is to say that God (Jehovah) is the Truth of all Existence at this very moment and
this moment alone, which in Its permanence will be the same as it Exists tomorrow, despite man’s
various shenanigans against its Natural Harmony and Design. The essence of Jehovah, of Life
Itself, and of the Law that abounds over It, simply does not change, any more than the substance
that is the potter’s clay ceases to be clay once it's formed into a bowl or chalice.

Inversely, the realm of man’s re-creation relies absolutely upon its own created history and the
recording of legal (un-Real) events, such Þctions being in no way a Living or permanent Existence.
All creations of man are dead and temporary. God Creates, while man merely names and re-
purposes God’s Creation inharmoniously with God’s Law of Nature. This distinction will be pulled
into focus throughout this work, and is key to comprehending the scriptural teachings, as what is
both Real and Þguratively Life and death. For what is of (belonging to) man and what is of (a
Creation of) God is never the same. This is not religion, but the very essence of all Law.

It is only when the words (noun/names) of man overcomes the Word (frequency and harmony) of
God that a secular war against our own spiritual Nature ensues. Of course, it is also a self-evident
Truth that Nature always wins in the end, for what is timeless encompasses the minuteness of all
that is merely man’s supposedly recorded history. Man, to put it simply, will be defeated either
when he realizes heÕs part of Nature and returns to It, ceasing to Þght against that which sustains
him, or he arrogantly defeats himself by defeating Nature’s gift of Life. Man’s temporary designs,
his languages, and his corruptions of Nature will all eventually die in the end, just as eventually
sand castles are ßooded, leveled, and absorbed back into that which they were created from.
Temporary is not necessarily a word associated with length of time or false existence as much as it
is a contradistinction to the Permanence of the Design of Nature and Its Law. In other words, what
is temporary has not its source in Nature (God's Realm), but in manÕs. The ßower that blooms
never seeks death or extinction, for the intent of its blooms is to seed itself and continue its Life
Force in another. So too is manÕs seed. Man, like the ßower, never dies off, for his offspring lives on,
his roots giving eternal Life through the passing of the blood of his body. This, in its most basic of
understandings, is what it is to worship God everlasting. It is to Live by religiously following only
God's Law of Nature, and to protect it at all costs and self-sacriÞce. Here lies the difference between
these two realms, of the permanent (God’s Creation and Word) and the temporary (man’s creations
and laws). Between each and every law passed or rescinded, between every court decision and
precedent set by ten’s of thousands of judges in this nation, between every failed and failing empire
built to impossibly last, and between ever treaty signed… each of these temporary states of what
government and its law is necessarily changes. Its foundation is constantly being altered, for its
foundation is only the Þctional designs and words of ofÞcial persons in ßattering, legally assigned
titles. Its foundation is belief, and such faith in false things always dies. There is never a day in
which these governments are the same from one day to the next, and certainly not from one
generation to the next! Only the Word (Law) of God may save us from our pretended, temporary
selves (as strawmen), even from our own words, simply because that Word is never-changing and
thus never-ending. It is the very frequency and harmony of Life, of what is True Existence.

To be clear, the Word of God is not made of the words of man, but is the self-evident and self-
existent Reality of the very Design and Law of Life Itself. Inversely, the legal law of man is made
entirely of words that have absolutely nothing to do with God's Nature.

We must realize that God’s wrath will only be manifested as the consequences of our own vain,
irresponsible, and inharmonious actions against that permanent Design of Nature that sustains our
very Existence. Just as in the legal realm, ignorance of God’s Natural Law (Word) is no excuse! As
we scientiÞcally tear down the Heavenly Utopia that is the harmony of this untarnished Nature of
Earth down to Its microcosmic and microcellular level today, destroying It in a vain attempt to

!27
understand Its Design through the extremely limited purview of the art of human-sciences, so too
are we destroying ourselves by disregarding the self-evident Word (Law) of scripture. Our wrath is
our own. Only by the destruction of the minuscule, individual parts of Jehovah and Its Nature may
man ever have the ever-limited knowledge and discovery of the Design of God’s Full Nature, and
to acquire such knowledge will necessarily spell the end of man, the end of that harmony (Word)
that sustains Life. Tearing apart and killing anything so as to understand its Source of Existence is
at best a psychopathy of anarchy (lawlessness) and at worst a legalized, amorally accepted,
licensed “science.” God will of course remain, and hopefully those who embrace the Reality of
God, as all the rest of Nature (Creation) Lives and Breathes only within God and without such
destructive artiÞces or the foolish desire to comprehend them at their own expense. This is the True
message of the Bible, and this Truth is what the church and state wish to keep buried in protection
of their legal system and its corporate structure. For the licensure for such destructive behavior by
men can only be approved by that which is opposed to Nature, opposed to God. Only through
legally approved means may man destroy his own Nature. And even more importantly, only
through the propagandist lies of church and state completely against God’s Word as promulgated
by scripture may otherwise True men of God be tricked into allowing such unnatural destruction to
take place.

This work is presented with the intent to absolutely and without question show all of this to be the
only Truth, both in Life and as the True spirit of the ancient scriptural teachings that have been so
purposefully misapplied and misinterpreted that no man is thus able to attain this Highest state of
Pure Being in Nature (Heaven). For Truth is not a word, not an opinion, and certainly not a legal
fact. Truth is only Self-Existence. All other established ÒtruthsÓ of menÕs designs are Þctions of the
mind, mere excuses to act irresponsibly through the personiÞcation of the strawman argument,
fallaciously blaming the artiÞcial persons of men instead of taking full responsibility for their and
our own True Selves. Our actions are only ever our own, never that of the names and titles we
pretend to be despite our True Nature. It is this Þctional matrix of legal naming and thus re-
presentation of all things that is so repeatedly warned about in the Bible and in other “sacred”
Books of antiquity.

But do not mistake these words as the “religion” (noun) of any man or system of men, least of all
my own, for the Truth of God (verb) and the Þctions of manÕs doctrinal religions (nouns/names)
are always opposed to each other; one Created without manÕs designs and imaginations to beneÞt
only God and thus manÕs True Nature, and all others re-created to beneÞt only manÕs artiÞcial, self-
serving designs and corporate structure of all nations in mammon. When each of us begins acting
in our True Nature without the artiÞce of legal Þctions, ßattering titles, added names, insurance
numbers, and member-ships to such corporations (artiÞcial persons) calling themselves as churches
and government agencies, then and only then will our expression of religion be True and our
individual Lives be considered “eternal” as Purely Religious one’s under the Highest Law of
Nature. Only then may we see Heaven for what It Is. Religion, by any name (denomination), is
only the false creation of man, an empty title (name) for what is Real (verb). God knows no
ÒChristians,Ó ÒMuslims,Ó or ÒJews.Ó These are but false and ßattering titles used by men who
pretend religion without acting the part without following the Law. These names are not a part of
Nature (Creation), originating only from the imaginations of men. They are empty words. No
pendent, no symbol, no cruciÞx, no baptismal certiÞcate, no cross, no crescent and moon, no seal of
Solomon (e.g., ÒStar of DavidÓ) in the dark arts of witchcraft, and no afÞliation with anything in
these commercial Ònon-proÞtÓ systems of mammon can create this state of True Religious Being.
All of these things are false idols, the symbology of magic words. What is symbolic is not what is
Real, and should never be worshiped above that which it supposedly re-presents in form but
without actual substance. Only the anonymous, ambiguous actions of the private man may invoke
this True Nature, the actions of True Love and Charity without any expectation of return on such
investments into the welfare of all others and into the mutually assured protection of all of God’s
Creation. Only this revealed knowledge of the Highest moral Law of scripture (ancient, self-evident
knowledge) may ensure a man’s place of Natural Liberty in God’s Kingdom of Nature.

!28
 Don’t believe it? For most of my life, I didn’t either. In order to understand what God is I had to
overcome the stumbling block of organized religion and public education. So too will you. What
you are about to read will most certainly be an afÞrmation of just how misled we have all been. But
you must choose to walk the path revealed so long ago that has been so hidden from so many
generations before us by those false gods and the priest-class (idols) of the nations of Caesar.

—=—

“Deeply earnest and thoughtful people 


stand on shaky footing with the public.”
—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

It is sometimes difÞcult to contemplate the importance of the speciÞc meaning of words, and even
more difÞcult to comprehend the extreme importance of those speciÞcally deÞned words versus
their ambiguous nature. In other words, the importance of the establishment and clarity of name
and title (legal status of a Þctional person) as property is paramount to manÕs artiÞcial law, for the
proprietary law of persons only applies to proprietary legal persons. Remember, no man is actually
a person, but all persons are the false representations of men. Man is of Nature, while persons are
always a creation of legal Þction (of man). What man creates is not and cannot be man, but merely a
similitude of man, a frankenstein monster. Ambiguity has no place in manÕs Þctional legal realm,
for all things artiÞcial must be proven Þrst to Þctionally exist (in word format) before they may be
examined and administered. This is to say that nothing of God, meaning nothing of self-existence
and self-evidence can be created by man. Thus he who makes an afÞrmation against you, namely he
being the legal government of the state via its agent (attorney), must show evidence that a word
has a speciÞc meaning, especially the speciÞc name of a manÕs Ònatural person.Ó If the name is too
ambiguous, meaning it carries two or more possible and presentable meanings, then it cannot be
proven to legally, artiÞcially exist without attestation and conÞrmation by he who uses it. The Þrst
(christian) name cannot stand legally without a legal last surname attached, for the Þrst name is
always only ever considered as ambiguous, and thus technically can only be private and thus
publicly anonymous, meaning that the man cannot be recognized as the artiÞcial persona created
by the mixed name, titles, numbers, and marks of the legal realm and government if he only uses
his christian (Þrst) name in an unblemished state of Being. In other words, only when the name is
less respected than the subject of the name is man free from any legally contracted dis-ease. And so
an anonymous work such as this need not Exist without any ambiguous name attached to remain a
private work, but only without an unambiguous ÒlegalÓ name attached that causes it publicity, as
to become public property.

To clear up any doubt of intent or law, the author here chooses to remain anonymous only in the
legal sense of the word, keeping my good, God-given, and highest-in-authority and Source (Þrst)
name separate and without any meaning or attachment to that which is Þctional, legal, and/or
artiÞcial. For the purposes of this work my Þrst name is my last name, my last will and testament,
and the only proof possible of my True intent under God. No suggestion or consideration of the use
of the nonlegal name (cognomen) ÒRichardsonÓ should be assumed as a legal use in any way
whatsoever within, and its use serves only as the biological description of the blood of my True
family name, not of any form of state personhood (legal status). It is not based on any legally
considered ÒeventÓ nor is it used as any type of nickname or agnomen. And so under absolutely no
circumstances should this work be mistaken or construed in any manner to be a work of any
Þctional, legal person, especially one surnamed Clint Richardson or as any other legal entity or
persona, nor that it was created in or under any jurisdiction or law of man or of nations. It and the
responsibility for its Existence is mine and mine alone, and I am only ever to be considered as a 






!29
Creation and Act of God. This is my Life and my Highest Law, and It is declared here in as
unambiguous a language as I have in my knowledge to construct in order to express my own Pure
intent.

For the reader, please note that these statements are only those of intent, placed here for the
purpose of quelling any future considerations by unscrupulous agents (attorney’s) and tax-farmers
within man’s legal jurisdiction and systems of law. It is necessary. It is evidence of my own patent
and intended ambiguity in the matter of this work as an establishment of its anonymity and of its
privacy, as well as an intentional, total separation of its intent and Existence to any legal Þction or
persona without exception.

—=—

“A patent ambiguity CANNOT BE CLEARED UP BY EXTRINSIC

EVIDENCE (or is never holden by averment).”
—AMBIGUITAS VERBORUM PATENS NULLA VERIFICATIONE EXCLUDITUR. (Black4)

—=—

“An ambiguous contract is to be interpreted against the seller.”

— AMBIGUUM PACTUM CONTRA VENDITOREM INTERPRETANDUM EST. (Black4)

—=—

“An ambiguous plea ought to be interpreted against the party pleading

it.”
—AMBIGUUM PLACITUM INTERPRETARI DEBET CONTRA PROFERENTEM. Co.Litt. 303b. (Black4)

—=—

“In doubtful cases, the presumption always is in behalf of the crown.”


—AMBIGUIS CASIBUS SEMPER PRAESUMITUR PRO REGE. Lofft, Append. 248. (Black4)

—=—

And just who or what is the seller of the contract of personhood? The answer can only be govern-
ment of course, the very creator and patenter of such Þction. If I sign a contract by my christian
(Þrst) name alone, an act I would never do, I have nevertheless not signed it legally. Nature has not
been defeated until I use a full sig-nature showing intent to act in the proprietarily admixed and
patented Þrst (christian name) and last (surname) of the strawman I am acting in commercial
agency for. Thus all contracts will be interpreted against me, for I have established that false, legal
id-entity as my self in surety. Once I am id-entiÞed legally (anti-God), I have thrown myself at the
mercy of the court (run by a magistrate god and administrator of legal Þctions), for I am acting in
the person (property) of another.

But what’s so important about a name? Why do I wish to remain an anonymous, private,
ambiguous Act of God for the purposes of this work and in my own Life? And why should I be so
fervent here, at the beginning, to establish the fact that I am only that I am, and that I am not a
Ònatural personÓ or any other form of registered or registrable legal personiÞcation or status?

!30
We have so much to dis-cover…

First and foremost, in wishing to keep this as a Purely private work with all rights and privileges
reserved to my own True Self, I must here declare my own ambiguity so that no de facto govern-
ment can claim otherwise, and so that any attempts to legally stall or steal (pirate) this work into
the public realm through “copyright” may be extinguished at the outset.

Let us be clear here that a “natural person” is a STRAWMAN; the birth-name and imaginary vessel
of a personiÞcation of a legal status that does not Exist in Reality (in Nature), and only has artiÞcial
life in a legal jurisdiction (the Þctional name/noun form of a Þctional place). We cannot thus
assume that all men are “natural persons,” which exist only in places not of God's Nature, for the
purpose of this linguistic trickery of legalese and of ßattering titles such as these is purely to
publicly register man into a Þctional, artiÞcial state of being and belief (love), under a contract of
law that is against his own purpose and Nature. In other words, an unambiguous legal name and
title causes an otherwise ambiguous, legally nameless, unmarked man as a Creation and Act Purely
of God to magically re-appear in the Þctional, legal realm as that which is only his image without
substance. It’s like being drawn in as a cartoon caricature of oneself.

CARICATURE - noun - A Þgure or DESCRIPTION in which BEAUTIES ARE CONCEALED

and BLEMISHES EXAGGERATED, but still bearing a RESEMBLANCE to the object. - verb
transitive - To MAKE or draw a caricature; TO REPRESENT AS MORE UGLY THAN THE
LIFE. (Webs1828)

—=—

To be in citizenship under the United States (a municipal corporation and district) is to be a

caricature (false persona) in the realm and jurisdiction of legal Þction. And Þction is always
considered as dead. Thus the person kills the Nature of man by causing unambiguity, by
destroying the True Nature of man and re-presenting him only in cartoon form without substance
(without consideration of blood and soul). For the agents of that imaginary realm cannot entertain
us (men) as its resident guests unless we accept its mark of name and number and agree to its
dominion, not over us, but over our state of surety in joinder of its artiÞcial personiÞcation
(caricature) of us; over the names, titles, and other bestowed Þctions we use that belong to the state.
Its law is only ever over its own property, its own false creation, its own Þctional persons, just as
GodÕs Law is only over man as GodÕs Creation of Nature. It is the use of anotherÕs name, the
enjoined surname, and all legal beneÞts attached to that legal name that causes us to be enslaved
by the law of persons, for we are acting in the persona of that false character and not as our True
Selves. Thus we work, play, pray, and Òmake a livingÓ to beneÞt the state in a corporate,
commercial franchise of its sure, dead name. To be free in commerce within a corporation is to be in
political freedom, which is merely another word for a legal franchise. Freedom in political society
is an illusion, for True freedom is never political (Þctional). Natural Freedom is not made of words.
And so the state is our surrogate land-lord and master, our principal, and we its servants and
agents, even as we attend its corporate churches under its false, proprietary surname (person). We
seem to forget the simple words of the scriptures, which plainly declare that man may have but one
master, God or mammon. Citizenship is abandonment of God, and thus is an abandonment of what
is called as Òunalienable,Ó ÒGod-given,Ó or ÒNaturalÓ rights. To add a positive (state-granted) right
is to take away a negative (God-given) right.

Again, a citizen-ship of a nation only has franchise rights to operate in the person (property) of the
district (under distress, distraint, and seizure). And to be perfectly clear, a citizen-ship can exist
nowhere else but in that jurisdiction (property) of the United States. It can live in a commercial
franchise, never True freedom, for persons are never of the Natural Realm of Truth.

!31
 —=—

“In a popular sense, THE POLITICAL RIGHTS OF SUBJECTS AND

CITIZENS ARE FRANCHISES, such as the right of suffrage.”
ÐBlackÕs Law 2nd Edition, deÞnition of Ôfranchise’ (Black2)

—=—

Franchise = freedom. It’s very Orwellian, to be sure. War is peace (commerce) and freedom is
slavery (franchise). In the legal Þction, these turn out to be provable facts of law, just as all ten
planks of Marx’s Communist Manifesto have literally been made “law” in the United States! And
yet it has always been this way, under the popes and kings and other gods of the empires and
nations of history. The common people have always been controlled as property, as persons
(Þctions) of law.

To show our collective and intentional brainwashing and ignorance of this term of the legal art,
let’s stop and consider who could have possibly written this work that you are presently reading if
it was not some “natural person?” If all men are automatically considered as “natural persons,” this
law in the United States Code would be a pointless redundancy, as it would refer to all living men
in total sum across the entirety of earth as such in legal title. But we all know that the law of nations
only exists in the jurisdiction (Þctional realm) of each nation that agrees to be part of that artiÞcial
law. And so we can state clearly here that all men are indeed not “natural persons,” and that all
men are thus not acting as strawmen without some deceitful inducement and voluntary intention
to do so.

The principals (maxim’s) of law certainly agree:

—=—

“Every person is a man, BUT NOT EVERY MAN A PERSON.”

ÑOmnis persona est homo, sed non vicissim. Calvin. (Black1)

—=—

And so, as we will discover, the term Ònatural personÓ only refers to the legal (Þctional) status of a
commercial or other form of citizen-ship (vessel), as a Þctional creation of a legal, Þctional
character, but never to a man considered under and following God’s Nature and Highest Law,
which admonishes and forbids respect of all persons. Fiction destroys the True Nature of every-
thing it Þguratively and contractually touches. It reveals no substance, re-presenting only an
imaginary form. A person is no different from any other Þctional character in any other Þctional
story or novel. And the government is the writer and publisher of each Þctional persona, causing
each of us to change our Natural course in Life towards some mammon-driven ad-venture in that
legal commercial realm, and thus ultimately towards the pursuit of money (Þction) instead of God.
Our master is chosen not by our thoughts but by our actions in or not within a commercial persona,
for a “natural person” is only a valuable consideration in time (labor) as money. We choose our
God not by choice of name or title, but by which Law we follow and thus which Nature we respect,
for the nature of Þction is always a lie. We pretend to exist in-dividually (not divided from the
nation) as a proprietary slave (natural person) of it; in a persona that must be driven by an inter-
mediary puppeteer (agent), which is also connected to the strings (laws) of a higher puppet-master
(creator/god/principal). For to use the property (name of person) of another requires the man
driving it (in agency) to also be driven by the legal strings and law of the actual owner of that
property (name of person), under the law of the legal district.

!32
The false nature (legal source and realm) of Þction is not and is directly opposed to the Nature
(Reality/Creation) of God. Art is never Reality, only a Þctional re-presentation of It. These are two
opposing realms, as matter and anti-matter, or to be more accurate, christ and anti-christ. A
spiritual man Exists despite any and all status (words), while a person unambiguously and
speciÞcally exists only as some assigned and registered, imaginarily created, unique legal status.
One is GodÕs Creation and one is manÕs re-creation. OneÕs True Existence has substance and is able
to be comprehended and veriÞed as a self-evident Truth by all of the senses, whereas that other
artiÞcial (legal) existence is utter non-sense, an un-Truth, un-Natural, and so must be proven to exist
in a Þctional realm through some legalistic, artiÞcial means such as contract, bond, identiÞcation,
etc. A legal existence, to be clear, occupies no space in GodÕs Realm of Reality and Nature. It is not a
Creation of God. It is not of Source, and has no Natural Origin. It is intangible, a Þction of the mind,
existing only in the imaginations of men and as words on paper.

This must be understood here, for I, as the private author of this work, certainly claim no such legal
name, title, or other legal mark, sign, or status (persona), nor any protections, insurances, or
guarantees thereof for this work, having no nickname or surname to be considered thereof. I claim
no protection and thus give no subjection to any law offering such artiÞcial monetary or other
securities or protections. I gladly attach my christian and only my christian name to this work, and so
no implication or presumption of any additional name caused by any event or other legal means or
re-creation should be construed here.

—=—

“When a man is made a spiritual peer HE LOSES HIS SURNAME;

when a temporal, HIS CHRISTIAN NAME.”
—Jonathan Swift, Thoughts on various subjects, moral & diverting

—=—

ItÕs simple. He who lives temporally must do so in person. He who lives spiritually must do so
without person. One never loses one's Christian name, one only loses the power and authority of
the Christian name by placing a legal surname next to it, altering the Natural course of the spirit
towards worldly things of no substance.

The spirit knows and respects no name but the unblemished Þrst, God-given gift name, or
ÒchristianÓ name, just as the temporal or legal realm knows and respects no name but the last, or
surname so attached, representing a sign of defeat of the will and power of a man too weak-
minded to be voluntarily bound under only God's Law. It is the legal mixture of these two names,
of Reality and a Þction of law, that causes man to lose touch with his Nature and Source. The last
name reveals the master. And so for the beneÞt of the reader, I can safely say that the hardest thing
I have ever forced myself to do is to use only my Þrst, christian, and Highest name upon this work.
This abandonment of the Þctional persona and with it my so-called last name is just one of the
many mental hurdles I must jump over in order to correct my own path and get reacquainted with
my True Self. For the admixed legal name is the source of all Þctional statuses, titles, dis-ease, and
registered things. Without it, I am only that which I am and nothing more. I am simply private. I
am no person, place, or thing.

This word, name, is the hinge upon which all legal (artiÞcial) things attach and have standing under
(understanding). Without a name, which signiÞes a distinct person, place, or thing (name = noun),
there is only ambiguity, making it impossible to distinguish one man or thing from another one
with the same christian (Þrst) name, and so no legal aspects of the artiÞce may be attached to the
man, for no legal person (status) can be found and attached to GodÕs Nature. A man without a
name in law is unseen, unheard, unalienable, and unattainable. For all defects and titles are only of
the name of a legal status (false persona), not of the man. Man, in GodÕs purview, is a Creation of

!33
Perfection no matter what his shape or form, as all Nature Is in Its self-evident (True) Existence. But
this is only True as long as man remains Pure in his own Source of Nature, which can only happen
if man ÒreligiouslyÓ follows the Law of God. To deÞle the Law of Nature is to deÞle Jehovah, for
the body is a temple of Jehovah, and so such legal persona is a deÞlement of Self as part of GodÕs
Perfect Creation of Nature. And so any additions to man in the form of imaginary, legal Þctions of
the law, licenses to commit crime, and other inventions of men can only be an abomination of that
Perfection of Design, and can only stand temporarily in disharmony against It. Do not take this in a
religious sense as much as in a protective, Lawful sense. You are Perfect in your Creation, born into
Nature by Its Design and no other, Created in the Purest of innocence and without artiÞce or
blemish (word/name or mark). It is only the events that take place after-birth that cause us defects
in name and by title, causing our own claim over our own minds, bodies, and souls to become
secondary to the gods of the law of nations.

And so this word name is one that you may consider revisiting often as we press forward, for it is
the magnet that attracts all other legal considerations. For a person must have and be created with
a name, while a man is inherently nameless. Words, and especially names (nouns), are simply not
born of Nature, not Creations of God, being only the tools of men. As we progress, each facet of this
word name will be meticulously examined so that by the end of this multi-volumed work the reader
will have no misgivings or doubts that all sin, as everything evil, artiÞcial, legal, and debilitating
cannot exist without a contracted, additional name (noun). Just remember, no names and no words
actually Exist in Nature. The God of Nature, also said to be the God of Life and self-Existence, is
not the Creator of artiÞce, nor of names, nor of titles, nor of numbers, nor of codes, nor of symbols,
nor of language, nor of anything that is merely a creation of the minds of men. Nature (God, as so-
called JEHOVAH) Exists despite whatever we may call It or call our selves. For we are each and
every One of us a part of that Whole Being of Nature, Perfect and untainted. No man, no Life, no
thing, and no place is Created by God into Nature with any name (noun) attached to It. There is
only One Place and One Life. Man does not hunt and gather food by luring and calling it by its
name, nor does he grow or Þnd his food by invoking its title. Nothing in Nature is a slave to its
proscribed name as man allows himself to be. And yet, by invoking the artfully pretended
authority of the legal names that man assigns to all things in GodÕs nameless Realm of Nature, man
enslaves all things under his own immoral law. Through the forcibly assigned names of all that is
already in self-Existence, God's Nature and Law is bypassed and ignored in lieu of the law of
names (of Þctional persons, places, and things). When all of Nature is personiÞed, redeÞned, and
thus anthropomorphized into legal words, names, and titles, then all of Nature has been placed
into an artiÞcial matrix of false valuation, where every aspect of every life form is assigned a value
in money. And when the words and names are considered more Real than Life and Nature Itself, all
of which together is considered as Jehovah or as the ÒLiving God,Ó then hell on earth has been
legally created, for what is legally named is therefore spiritually dead. For a price, anything in
Nature may be sold and destroyed by the legally minded man acting in a persona and law not his
own, as that which is pretended to be unbound by the Law of God's Nature. Welcome to the new
millennium, to the Godless virtual reality and artiÞcial intelligence of the twenty-Þrst century,
where all of Nature as Creation is no longer celebrated, worshiped, and protected as the Source of
Life and as the monotheistic God.

Comprehend this, and you may comprehend the entire foundation of all of manÕs legalistic
(artiÞcial) law, which can only be attached and have authority over artiÞcial (legal) persons, places,
and things (nouns/names), none of which actually Exist in Nature, for none of these are Original
Acts (verb) of God. Without such a strawman, without the lies of manÕs designs against the Origin
and Source of man in Nature under God, man is simply in perfect ambiguity. His lack of persona
and of legal name equals a lack of legal capacity, meaning the law over artiÞcial persons, places,
and things cannot stick to the Real and untainted man because the man is not wearing any
unambiguous, proprietary law-suit (false persona) of another. And so we must realize that True
Freedom is to be no thing. A person is a named thing, an entity not of Nature, and therefore not
Free in Nature. A person has no place or respect in God's Realm and Law. This is again the
foundation of Law. Our actions and the Law we follow represents the God we choose to worship.
One thing is for sure, all men will have a god, be it the legal gods of the nations or the True God of

!34
Nature. This is a self-evident Truth. It is inescapable. For the Law doesn’t choose us, we choose It.
And only by our actions under that Law is our choice in God or of mammon manifest. Wearing a
cross or other empty symbol around one's neck while every day breaking the Law of Nature is
foolishness in the eyes (judgement) of God. And yet this state of limbo, of lukewarmness to the
scriptural knowledge of Law is exactly where the church wishes us to subsist under its false
doctrines, idolatry, and imagery.

NAME - noun - 1. That by which a THING is called; the sound or combination of sounds
used TO EXPRESS AN IDEA, OR ANY MATERIAL SUBSTANCE, QUALITY OR ACT; AN
APPELLATION ATTACHED TO A THING BY CUSTOMARY USE, by which it may be
vocally DISTINGUISHED FROM OTHER THINGS. A name may be ATTACHED to an
INDIVIDUAL ONLY, and is then PROPER or appropriate, as John, Thomas, London, Paris;
or it may be attached to a SPECIES, GENUS, OR CLASS OF THINGS, as SHEEP, GOAT,
horse, tree, ANIMAL, which are called COMMON names, SPECIFIC OR GENERIC (special
or general, by species or by gens). 2. THE LETTERS OR CHARACTERS written or engraved,
expressing the sounds BY WHICH A PERSON OR THING IS KNOWN AND
DISTINGUISHED. 3. A PERSON. They list with women each degenerate name. 4.
REPUTATION; CHARACTER; that which is COMMONLY said of a PERSON; as a good
name; a bad name. 5. Renown; fame; honor; celebrity; eminence; praise; DISTINCTION.
What men of name resort to him? 6. Remembrance; memory. The Lord shall BLOT OUT HIS
NAME from under heaven. Deuteronomy 29:20. 7. APPEARANCE ONLY; sound only; NOT
REALITY; as a friend in name. Revelation 3:1. 8. AUTHORITY; behalf; part; as in the name
of the people. WHEN A MAN SPEAKS OR ACTS IN THE NAME OF ANOTHER, HE
DOES IT BY THEIR AUTHORITY OR IN THEIR BEHALF, AS THEIR REPRESENTATIVE.
9. ASSUMED CHARACTER OF ANOTHER. Had forged a treason in my patrons name. 10.
In Scripture, the name of God signiÞes his titles, his attributes, his will or purpose, his honor
and glory, his word, his grace, his wisdom, power and goodness, his worship or service, or
God himself. 11. ISSUE; POSTERITY THAT PRESERVES THE NAME. Deuteronomy 25:6.
12. In grammar, A NOUN. To call names, to apply opprobrious names; to call by reproachful
appellations. To take the name of God in vain, to swear falsely or profanely, or to use the
name of God with levity or contempt. Exodus 20:7. TO KNOW BY NAME TO HONOR by a
particular friendship OR FAMILIARITY. Exodus 33:12. CHRISTIAN NAME: THE NAME A
PERSON RECEIVES BY BAPTISM, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM SURNAME. - verb
transitive - To call, TO NAME TO INVOKE. 1. To set or give to any person or thing a sound
or combination of sounds by which it may be known and distinguished; to call; to give an
appellation to. She named the child Ichabod. 1 Samuel 4:21. Thus was the building left
Ridiculous, and the work confusion named. 2. To mention by name; to utter or pronounce the
sound or sounds BY WHICH A PERSON OR THING IS KNOWN AND DISTINGUISHED.
Neither use thyself to the naming of the Holy One. 3. TO NOMINATE; TO DESIGNATE FOR
ANY PURPOSE BY NAME. Thou shalt anoint to me him whom I name to thee. I Samuel 16. 4.
TO ENTITLE. To the name of Christ, to make profession of faith in him. 2 Timothy 4:1.
(Webs1828)

—=—

Bottom line: only your given, Þrst name is your own. It is manÕs only Truly spiritual property, as is
that to which one passes on in gift to one’s child. It is respect of your own pure and unblemished
True Self, free from the servitude to anyone or anything but the Highest Law of God. It is your
Origin, representing your only True Source, state, and substance of Being, as the harmonious trinity
of mind, body, and soul. It is called the christian name in law, referring to the God-given name that
cannot be defeated, for the Creator controls all that is Created by It. This is not a fact that is up for
debate, and every legal dictionary (opinion of the court) will tell you that your Þrst name is the
“christian name.” To deny this and the power that name holds is a fools errand.

!35
 —=—

“Names are divided into CHRISTIAN NAMES, as, Benjamin, AND

SURNAMES, as, Franklin… NO MAN CAN HAVE MORE THAN ONE
CHRISTIAN NAME… WHEN A PERSON USES A NAME IN
MAKING A CONTRACT UNDER SEAL, HE WILL NOT BE
PERMITTED TO SAY THAT IT IS NOT HIS NAME; as, if he sign and
seal a bond " A and B," (BEING HIS OWN AND HIS PARTNER’S
NAME), and he had no authority from his partner to make such a deed,
HE CANNOT DENY that his name is A. & B. And if a man describes
himself in the body of a deed by the name of James and signs it John, he
cannot, on being sued by the latter name, plead that his name is James.”
ÑDeÞnition #11 for NAME, (Bouv1856)

—=—

Remember, it is their system, their words, and therefore their deÞnition. It is not Reality, and so to
argue over the correct form of Þction, the truth about a lie, makes you a bigger fool than anyone. If
you use one of their words, one of their names, you cannot claim to be a non-user. Be not bothered
by the use of the word Òchristian.Ó Rather, realize that their (the stateÕs) use of that word signiÞes
that the power of christ is not only recognized in that court, but is more powerful than any name
they design and seek to attach to that Þrst (Source) name. Grow up. Stop denying what is self-
evident and stop making excuses for remaining the slave of false gods. But most of all, stop trying
to defeat that which cannot be defeated. For like a casino, the house always wins. Why? Because it
is not your system, it is not your law, and it is not in your power or authority to alter their
proprietary terms that govern their own property (persons, places, and things). If they say you
have a christian name, you better damn well accept that fact and use it to your advantage, not deny
it and stand in a completely unlearned idiocracy of denial. Simply stated, the acknowledgement by
the courts of your christian (Þrst) name is an acknowledgment of your power to choose your own
Law. They must give you a choice or their law is void. And so in order to cause you to consent to
their law of Þction, they summon you to appear in their Þctional persona. They call you by their
proprietary name, not your own. They get you to consent to the additional surname and thus to the
law that rules over that last, artiÞcially created birth name. But most importantly, the judge gets
you to call him your father, even as you appear as the per-son of that legal, administrative god
(judge). All his power rests on your voluntary acceptance of the states proprietary surname being
not only attached to but attached in superiority over the Þrst (Source of Nature) name. By this
contractual binding of names, the state may now bypass the Natural Law and treat you as its
subject (voluntary slave) under its own Þctional law. Just like any other animal form of legally
named cattle, chattel, or live-stock, the man that acts in the surname of another is considered
merely as human capital to be managed, for while appearing and acting in the agency and persona
of their legal property (surname), we pretend to be something we are not. And there is nothing
more pathetic or more corrupt than a nation of slaves that believe they are free, and which are
given license to break with the Highest Foundation Law of their Creator.

STOCK - Descents. This is a metaphorical expression which designates, in the genealogy of a

family, THE PERSON from whom others are descended: those PERSONS who have so
descended are called BRANCHES. (Bouv1856)

—=—

!36
All other additions of name, title, number, mark, or any other artiÞcial designation, even those of a
sexually descriptive nature, are merely legalistic, Þctional creations of man. To add any other name
or title to your Þrst (Original) name is to take GodÕs given name, that is your Þrst name, in vain. It
is to change your stock, your status (persona). And so to act in the name of another is to attach the
bad name of another to your Good (God) name. And only under this false sur-name can crimes
against Nature and all of Life be legally justiÞed. For we pretend to be a person falsely created by
law that is not our True Self, as if the actions of some Þctional name can be responsible for our own
actions. The duty of personal responsibility for our own actions is lost. This is the gateway, the
source of all sin (syn).

The scriptures are replete and repetitious with warnings against all forms of legal personiÞcation.
They warn against the act of respecting persons and ßattering titles and of the power of such evil
(artiÞce) to cause us to act outside of GodÕs Law of Nature, outside of our very Self, which is to say
that we act against our very own Nature and that of others against the harmonious Design of
Creation.

But let us be clear that the personiÞcation of Jehovah as the story of Jesus christ is in no way a legal
Þction. Its intent is not to establish an artiÞcial, legal person, but to tell the story of and give an
example of the Highest Law to follow. This difference, the same difference in all personiÞcations
and anthropomorphized characters in moral story-telling from Plato to Steven King, must be
separated from what are the amoral intentions of all established Þctions of law called as legal
persons. The moral, parabolic, allegoric story of a personiÞed character in a story is not the same as
the falsely created legal existence of a person. To tell the story of the moral Law through a character
in a story is not the same as creating a Þctional man (person) in legal society. The Bible is of course
against all legal things. In fact, the whole story of christ is utterly against that of legal personhood
and the false, ßattering titles of the religious and social class systems that go with it. To be clear,
both the taking of and respecting of a last name (surname) and legal (ßattering) title for ourselves
and over others, especially under manÕs legal governance, is one of the most oft spoken about sins
of the Bible and of other ancient scriptures. If anything, the Law of the scriptures, the self-evident
Law of God and Nature, says only to act and be responsible as exactly what we are, as our True
Selves without any attached (forced) names or titles (styles), with no Þctions, insurances, protect-
ions, or securities from the artiÞcial constructs of manÕs designs of law in mammon. For only in and
by anotherÕs name can the act of the man be artiÞcially blamed on his Þctional, imaginary person
(personiÞed self-image). This is just a cop-out, a lack of personal (Self) responsibility.

In other words, the various licenses granted to the Þctional person under false law in a simulated
existence (persona) causes man to break the covenant of GodÕs Natural Law, as he pretends that the
responsibility for his own actions may be blamed on that Þctional character (person in law) that has
no substance without belief in (love of) its legal capacity. This is a similarly evil disposition as that
of any Òsoldier,Ó especially one that bombs innocent families with drones while claiming that only
his ßattering title ÒsoldierÓ was responsible, not his own True Self. Just following ordersÉ the cry
of the oppressor and of the slave, and the perfect example of the mind control (government) power
of the agency relationship. The point is that God judges every man alone and naked, without the
Þctional, make-believe personas (masks), characters, and ßattering titles he pretended to be hid
under in Real Life.

Only a Òsoldier,Ó for example, can legally kill without responsibility for his actions in war or in
peace, for his artiÞcial title gives legal (anti-God, anti-Nature) license (legal permission) to kill
another part of GodÕs Creation, which his government master has reclassiÞed into a ßattering title
such as ÒterroristÓ or Òinsurgent.Ó And so the Þctional ÒsoldierÓ kills not a man but another Þction
under the legal law. Yet the Highest Law of God respects no such falsities and Þctitious titles, and
sees only man killing another man, a son of God killing his own spiritual brother of GodÕs Creation.
But most importantly, only by using God’s name in vain (in contract with the devils of the church
and state), that is the ÒchristianÓ God-given name as our Þrst and highest authority of name; by
attaching our christian name to any other name (i.e. legal surname) we have taken GodÕs Gift and
utterly disrespected Its purpose and reason in vain, taking the law of the Þctional person (noun/

!37
name) over that of the Law of Nature or God’s Law (verb) of personal conduct. The Law of Nature
is a self-evident Law of conduct between men. Murder has no place therein, no matter what the
excuse. Thou shalt not kill means the same thing as thou shalt not kill in person or ßattering title.
Instead, we kill for the beneÞt of false gods in the name of commerce, of money, and of authority.
And governments collect on the insurance for each soldier (person/property) they commit to
danger and subsequent legal death. It’s a win-win.

And now, after that brief explanation, please allow me to continue with this spiritual disclaimer
against all legality and artiÞcial means to destroy and make public (pirate) this work.

No natural or other legal person (name) may own or copyright this work in any way under any
system of law, public or private, franchise or contract. The author claims sole privileges (total
privacy) in all respects to this work under the Highest Law of God, and I offer it freely and with
Pure intent to all who seek. There is no need to steal it in petty theft, for you cannot steal from the
willing, from a man who asks you, the reader, to share this work with all others. You cannot steal
that which is offered freely and without any expected consideration of any kind or form.

—=—

ÒThe term ÔÞnancial gainÕ includes receipt, or EXPECTATION OF

RECEIPT, of anything of VALUE, including the receipt of other
copyrighted works.”
—US Code, Title 17, Chapter 1, § 101

—=—

The United States dollar is a copyrighted and patented work under the property of the United
States government, especially in its intangible (non-cash) form called credit and debt that cannot be
created without license from its creator government. And I assure you that as a public person, you
do not own any thing that is Òpublic,Ó including your legal name and person, and especially not
the money in your pocket or in a bank account. Legal persons are as much the property of govern-
ment as the money that persons are allowed to use in that agency relationship. The positive right to
use any thing is not to be confused with the right of True ownership. Thus, I declare here that I
have no expectation whatsoever now or in the future of the receipt of any currency or of any other
valuable thing, copyrighted work, and/or legal tender, Real or Þctional, in any form of exchange or
note, for the free gift that is this work. No act other than a Purely (Spiritually) Charitable one
should ever be construed by any man, regardless of Þctional status or while acting in the pretended
character of a legal person and/or ÒpartyÓ to any legal system, or constitutional or unconstitutional
writing, etc.

In this light, I hereby declare that this work of my own labor (property) is not for commercial or
other sale in any capacity whatsoever from myself or from any Þctional persona, Ònatural,Ó
ÒartiÞcial,Ó or otherwise, or by that which may be construed as any legal entity or other artiÞce or
Þction of law. This work is not for proÞt any more than it is written by a prophet. It has and is
intended to have no registered legal title, no name, no number, no barcode, and is to remain always
and heretofore as valueless. It Exists without the consideration of money or valuation by the
systems of mammon. It is therefore PRICELESS! It is not registered, certiÞed, licensed, taxed, or
taxable, nor should it ever be considered as such in the future under any name whatsoever. It is
written by no Þctional persona, which in Reality (under God) is impossible and so stands without
respect of persons, for the God of Nature respects no artiÞce, no person or title of any manÕs artful
creation. This work is created only by my own ßesh-and-blood hand and no other. It is not ofÞcial
or formal. It is not a registered product of any Þctional government, citizen, or public citizenship,
nor is permission granted in any way for reproduction as such now or in the future by any such
person or other legally titled artiÞce. It is and always shall be a private, unpublished work and

!38
therefore should never be recreated or reprinted in any public or commercial way, means, or form
under any circumstances or means whatsoever unknown to myself, the non-legal, Real author and
laborer as a man and servant only of God. No consent is granted theretofore, nor should any form
of consent be in any way construed or pretended to be implied, and any deviation from this notice
must be expressed in writing and approved in equal manner by my Self. As written, this is the only
Law applicable to this work or to my own Self.

To be clear, any reproduction of this work for any commercial or other valuable consideration of
proÞt and/or gain without absolutely express, written permission by myself can and only will be
considered as theft. Freely sharing this work without expectation of anything in return is the only
acceptable act not covered by this will and testament of its author under God. In other words, this
work Exists only in the Purist state of Love and Charity in Nature and in no other form or place
(noun) and as no other person or thing (name/noun). No other form of intent should ever be
implied or construed with regard to this work or to the attitude and intent of its author (my True
Self), and any claim otherwise by any legal Þction or unwelcome person (persona non grata) should
hereby be considered as utterly ridiculous and dismissible in any legal (anti-God) court of man’s
so-called law (false doctrine). Fiction is always less than Nature, and always submissive to God’s
Law of Nature. That is, if you don’t sign your soul away in contract (devilry) with the state by
attaching its proprietary surname after and over your own Free and Natural, God-given, spiritual
Þrst name!

Fiction < Nature

Richardson < Clint

The problem is that most of us have no idea what a dirty word the term “public” actually is,
representing a privately owned holding corporation, for most of us have lived our whole lives
therein without contemplation of just what it is, comparable perhaps only as the concept of being
plugged-in to the science Þction realm of The Matrix without knowledge that it even “legally,”
artiÞcially exists. To be in and exist in “public” persona is to not reserve any of our “unalienable,”
God-given rights, which apply only to our christian (Gift of God) name. To be public is to be in a
state of total alienability. For even the public law is published, and is thus applied to all public
(government owned) persons (legal statuses), which are government property.

PUBLISH - verb transitive - [Latin publico. See PUBLIC.] 1. To discover or make known TO
MANKIND OR TO PEOPLE IN GENERAL WHAT BEFORE WAS PRIVATE OR
UNKNOWN; to divulge, as a private transaction; to promulgate or proclaim, as a law or
edict. WE PUBLISH A SECRET, by telling it to people WITHOUT RESERVE. LAWS ARE
PUBLISHED BY PRINTING OR BY PROCLAMATION. Christ and his apostles published
the glad tidings of salvation. Th' unwearied sun, from day to day, Does his Creator's power
display; And publishes to every land, The work of an Almighty hand. 2. To send a book into
the world; or TO SELL OR OFFER FOR SALE a book, map or print. 3. To utter; to put off or
into CIRCULATION; as, to publish a forged or counterfeit paper. 4. To make known by
POSTING, or by reading in a church; as, to publish banns of matrimony. We say also, THE
PERSONS INTENDING MARRIAGE ARE PUBLISHED; that is, THEIR INTENTION of
marriage is published. (Webs1828)

—=—

With further contemplation and due diligence, we Þnd that this word publish stems from a much
more sinister root, which is technically the same notion of what public citizen-ship is. When a child
wishes to roam the public halls of public school to use the public restroom for instance, he or she as
a registered public citizen-ship attending a public school must obtain permission (temporary
license) to travel to go to the bathroom, use its services, and return as a matter of predetermined,
commercially licensed course. And so the child (acting in false, legal persona and under state
surname) is required to obtain a hall pass in order to set about upon said commercial course. This,

!39
in and of itself, is merely a microcosmic slice of the biopsy of every one of us in the public realm.
We, as US district (corporate) citizenships, are required to have a pass to live, reside, and work
within the lands of the foreign States (territories) we inhabit, for they are not our lands, and we are
only tenants and renters on paper. Thus, we always need license and general identiÞcation as our
national hall pass (public easement) to conduct interstate commerce. While this will be explained in
detail within, for now let us comprehend that to publish anything, including the registering of our
own vital statistics and that of our offspring and property into public citizenship, is just another
word for pass.

PASS - verb - In practice. To utter or pronounce; as when the court passes sentence upon a
prisoner. Also to proceed; TO BE RENDERED OR GIVEN; as when judgment is said to pass
for the plaintiff in a suit. In legislative parlance, a bill or resolution is said to pass when it is
agreed to or enacted by the house, or when the body has sanctioned its adoption by the
requisite majority of votes; in the same circumstances, the body is said to pass the bill or
motion. When an auditor appointed to examine into any accounts certiÞes to their correctness,
he is said to pass them; i. e., they pass through the examination without being detained or
sent back for inaccuracy or imperfection. The term also means to examine into anything and
then authoritatively determine the disputed questions which it involves. In this sense a jury
is said to pass upon the rights or issues in litigation before them. IN THE LANGUAGE OF
CONVEYANCING, THE TERM MEANS TO MOVE FROM ONE PERSON TO ANOTHER;
TO BE TRANSFERRED OR CONVEYED FROM ONE OWNER TO ANOTHER; as in the
phrase "THE WORD 'HEIRS' WILL PASS THE FEE." TO PUBLISH; utter; TRANSFER;
CIRCULATE; IMPOSE FRAUDULENTLY. This is the meaning of the word when the offense
of passing counterfeit money or a forged paper is spoken of. "Pass," "utter," "publish," and
"sell" are in some respects convertible terms, and, in a given case, "PASS" MAY INCLUDE
UTTER, PUBLISH, AND SELL. The words "uttering" and "passing," used of notes, do not
necessarily import that they are transferred as genuine. The words include ANY DELIVERY
OF A NOTE TO ANOTHER FOR VALUE, with intent that it shall be put into circulation as
money. Passing a paper is putting it off in payment or exchange. Uttering it is a declaration
that it is good, with an intention to pass, or an offer to pass it. - noun - PERMISSION TO
PASS; A LICENSE TO GO OR COME; A CERTIFICATE, EMANATING FROM
AUTHORITY, wherein it is declared that a DESIGNATED PERSON is permitted to go
beyond certain boundaries which, without such authority, he could not lawfully pass. Also
a ticket issued by a railroad or other transportation company, authorizing a designated
person to travel free on its lines, between certain points or for a limited time. (Black4)

—=—

I, as the author of this work, am not “sending it into the world” as a published book. It is not in
circulation nor is it posted or registered for the intent of any legal means or protections. I am not
offering to pass it to anyone, but instead offer it in Pure Love and Charity to everyone. I have not
uttered it orally or in writing for the purposes of delivery into any public realm or under any public
law. I retain and reserve any and all rights and privileges against any that may be imagined by
men, and allow no others to exist surrounding this work despite my will. No one may legally own,
copyright, alter, or have any exclusive right to this work in any legal or other system but my Self,
with or without name or title. The “use” but not the “property” of this work is free to all men, and
only to men. No Þctions (persons) allowed.

As for the passing of things, we must realize that the birth and delivery process is the passing of
the certiÞed child to the federal state (district), as: Òany delivery of a note to another for value, with
intent that it shall be put into circulation as money.” Just so that we are clear, the bottom of the birth
certiÞcate, created at my supposed legal personÕs birth (artiÞcial creation), which was issued in the
name of the legal entity created at the event of the de-livery of my own vital statistics to the state,
as entitled ÒCLINT RICHARDSON,Ó is adorned with the words of its origin, which are: ÒMidwest
Banknote Company.” In other words, my actual Life (as recorded words labeled as the “vital
statisticsÓ thereof) was rendered into a Þctional persona of the federal district (Caesar), and this

!40
Þctional persona is essentially a public pass, which creates the legal status that allows me (as
registered agent of that Þctional legal person) to be recognized and to have legal: Òpermission to pass;
a license to go or come; a certiÞcate, emanating from authority, wherein it is declared that a designated person
is permitted to go beyond certain boundaries which, without such authority, he could not lawfully pass.Ó In
other words, I may roam around the virtual halls of the United States public jurisdiction and no
other, a prison for my debtor, which is the person (legal status, class, and rank in society) I carry in
the form of a certiÞed identiÞcation, usually in the form of a passport or driverÕs license. By
showing my virtual hall pass, thus proving through a publicly certiÞed and ofÞcially published
utterance (public identiÞcation) that I am a public subject of the sovereign and principal who owns
and controls that legal persona (status) as assigned to me as the agent (employee) of that
principality (municipal corporation), I am conÞrming the contractual relationship between myself
(as acting, registered agent for service of process) and the United States government jurisdiction
and district (principal).

But we are getting ahead of ourselvesÉ

While the underlying meaning of this deÞnition of the word ÒpublishÓ will not fully sink in to the
average reader quite yet, its importance and relevance will certainly be realized in a most horriÞc
way once this work in its entirety is digested. For to be a public entity is to belong to the public,
which belongs to another. And so to be clear, by proclaiming that this work is utterly private in
every way is to say that no ownership is to be assumed by any means or by any type of person,
natural or artiÞcial, legal or otherwise. To publish means to transfer ownership in exchange for
protection and agreement through subjection to a lower (legal) law. I choose not to do this, electing
instead to remain Pure and Charitable in all possibilities under God, and invoking only the Highest
Law thereof as my only Protection against this honorable den of thieves in legally established high
places under completely Þctional, ßattering titles.

—=—

“‘Publication’ is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to

the public BY SALE OR OTHER TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP, or by
rental, lease, or lending. The offering to distribute copies or
phonorecords to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution,
public performance, or public display, constitutes publication. A
PUBLIC PERFORMANCE OR DISPLAY OF A WORK DOES NOT OF
ITSELF CONSTITUTE PUBLICATION.”
ÑU.S.Code, Title 17, Chapter 1, ¤ 101

—=—

Again, under no circumstances should this work be construed in any manner as a Òpublication,Ó
legal or otherwise. It is not a published work in any way or form. And so the author offers none of
these above listed forms of distribution or publication, only the free use of my work without gain
and without personal ownership by any other. Under no circumstances should he who obtains
this work in any condition or form assume ownership of it, nor should his strawman (person) be
ascribed with such false authority so as to declare it as any form of legal property. It cannot be
conquered (purchased). It is forever a private work in whatever form it happens to appear, with all
rights privately reserved, and it can and will never be sold or published by its creator. However
you, the reader of this work, has attained this work, and in whatever form, it is simply not your
property.

If, as I recommend, the reader of this work is doing so from a digital document and wishes to
obtain a hard-copy of this work in the book-form we are accustomed to, complete with index, one

!41
will not be able to do so without understanding what has been written and disclaimed here. It is
only available as a gift given by my Self. And I do not apologize one bit for this fact or for the
difÞcult or limited way in which it may be obtained. There will be no receipt, no guarantees, no
consumer protectionsÉ for there will be no political or commercial transaction between us, and I
will not respect or deal with any Þctional, legal persona. If you feel that this work and its author
(my Self), after receiving it (in pdf form) freely in Charity and without any expectations of anything
of value in return, is worthy of a Gift of Pure Charity in whatever measurement and good will
without receipt or expectation, then the author would be happy to give the Pure gift of a softcover
copy of this work in book-form without obligation or expectation to do so. As Pure gifts born out of
Pure Love and Charity have no need for a receipt or monetary consideration, no receipt should be
expected for such spiritually driven acts of kindness. No record of any transaction should be
considered or sought after, and the faith of ultimate Trust alone under God is the only foundation
of duty one should expect, without any artiÞce of security (insurance and consumer protections) in
mammon. One could call this by the name (noun) of reciprocal gift-giving, but then, that would be
but a fallacious and Þctitious name attempted to be forcibly attached to that which is non-Þctional.

And so if all this seems like too much trouble, then by all means take this gift freely without any
expectations by myself. If you wish to make a gift in any other way, as the purest of Charitable
offerings and so that I can continue in the labor of this voluminous work and in other future
projects, I would be honored and humbled by such intentional kindness, respect, and Purity of
Charitable Love as God commands.

And as a bonus, it would probably really piss off the powers that be, those legal creators and
privateers of all this mischief in mammon, to use their iniquitous money against their own
usurious intent in privacy and in Pure charity. Supporting my efforts at the very least is an act of
private contempt for that which has enslaved and stolen all things in legalized piracy, which
ironically is what this work will expose as exactly what has happened to the re-public-ed common
peoples around the world and in every nation. For the best way to steal from all men is to cheat
them in piracy without them even knowing it has happened and continues to happen, through the
illusions of word-magic in implied public contract.

It is also declared here that this work should not ever be construed to be part of any Òpolitical
activitiesÓ effecting any agency or ofÞcial of the Government of the United States or of any of the
several (private) States or their Þctional, commercial state governments and agencies in allegiance
to it or them, or to any section or individual part of the public within the United States or any other
nation with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic, public, or foreign
policies of the United States, its public law, or with reference to any political, private, or public
interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country and/or State/state or political
party, nor of that of any such artfully, Þctitiously contrived Òdiplomats,Ó ÒMembers,Ó or so-called
ÒagentsÓ and Òemployees.Ó This work is designed only for the private use of private men, not to
the politics and legal diplomacies of governments and their agents and employees. There can be no
treason from without, only from within. This work is certainly without and not under the United
States jurisdiction and laws in any way. Again, this is a purely private work intended only for the
private, spiritual use of all men without the artiÞce and false-security of personhood. The author
takes no responsibility for the actions of its readers or their unrequited desires to share it Freely and
Lovingly in a non-commercial capacity with all. Any desires to hang any and all government
agents from the nearest tree is purely a detachment from this work, for the author stresses that all
men have been tricked by their own participation in false persona and ßattering titles of the state,
including even the most dirty and corrupt of politicians and landholders that have enslaved us all
through those false titles. Any such thoughts would only be the reasonable response to learning the
Truth and criminality of purely false, legally incorporated governments and religions. But I must
stress here that only total forgiveness for all men as the scriptures pro-claim can solve these
problems, and that the word ÒforgivenessÓ as attributed here merely means to stop supporting,
respecting, and participating voluntarily in these Þctional, legal matrixes and Þnancial systems of
mammon. To forgive is to stop giving respect, and instead for-give it just as you freely received it,
for none of us are so innocent that we may throw stones at the other, each of us having played our

!42
Þctional parts with equal delusion. Kill their Þctional persons, not them. Let the strawmen burn.
Destroy utterly their Þctions. But do no harm to their Reality (Nature), for their Lives are the
property of God to be judged thereof. Forgive the man his trespasses, and spill not his blood, but
merely strip away and turn your back on his false titles and authorities, both in mind and of body.
Let his artiÞce wallow, wither, and die in its own creation and realm if he insists on worshiping his
own creation and false gods of men and mammon, and respect it all no more. This is the only True
Self-defense. The only path presented herein is one of pure Charity and Love. There is no other
way, no other True path. We must forgive our Selves by returning that which does not belong to us,
namely our false legal persona (status) as property of government and all that is attached to it. The
slave must become the master of his own mind, body, and soul.

This work is not a creation or publication in any way by any legal person as deÞned in any of the
laws of the United States, United Nations, or of any other legal or sovereign government de facto or
de jure under any domestic or international law whatsoever. I am simply and without artiÞce that I
am. In other words, I reserve ALL rights without exception.

If it is unclear now why the author chooses to keep this work in totality and in perpetuity a private
creation without limitation or registration, it may indeed take the comprehension of what in totality
is written within this work to obtain such understanding. But here, now, I shall endeavor to explain
especially the reasons for this disclaimer.

—=—

“A GIFT is said to be PURE AND SIMPLE WHEN NO [ LEGAL ]

CONDITION OR QUALIFICATION is annexed.”
—SIMPLEX ET PURA DONATIO DICI POTERIT, UBI NULLA EST ADJECTA CONDITIO NEC MODUS. Bract. 1. (Black4)

—=—

Imagine a Lifestyle where all of your actions are charitable, where everything you do is purely to
the beneÞt of others, and where each action you take has no expectations of return (proÞt). Can you
imagine such a beautiful Existence? Well, that is certainly what the scriptures tell us to do.

It is important to acknowledge and under-stand that one's Þrst name (christian name) is indeed
considered by the state as an uncontrollable (ungovernable) and legally ambiguous gift from God,
as are we in our Natural essence of Life. That Þrst name shows us to be Purely and only an act of
God, being bound only by Its Law. Thus, when a legal last or ÒsurÓ name is attached (annexed) as a
qualiÞcation to oneÕs ÒGod-givenÓ christian name, we stand contracted to the legality (opposition
to God) that last name re-presents and so appear to stand against our very own Nature (Source) by
the administrators of persons. We throw away our Gift, and lose Its authority, for we lose the Law
implied by that unblemished gift (name) of and under God. This naming process literally re-
presents us in a spiritual death, where the strict written (Roman) law rules us in thoughtless
causality, our choice to act morally by religiously following a Higher Law than manÕs being
stripped away from us through control of that legal personhood. When choice is destroyed, so too
is moral compunction. When one justiÞes one's own immoral actions while acting in the agency
and false persona (property) of another and thus under its law, believing (loving) that the evil
actions one does while acting in an agentic state for another is morally reprehensible while at the
same time legally acceptable, then one has been conquered by words, by the magic spellings of the
written law of men. The person is used as an excuse to act without conscious consideration and
responsibility of one's actions, though there is certainly said to be no excuse before God (in Reality).
ItÕs the American way; blame the Þction and in doing so ignore the crime and never stand up to
that Þction, for corporations are persons with equal rights too. And so the legal destruction of
God's Nature is forgiven by those who otherwise would die for its preservation and care, cowed by
the sanctions and duties of legal law that require consent to even our own destruction if politically
necessary. We are then (in citizen-ship) no longer Living for and as a part of GodÕs Nature

!43
(Creation) but part of man’s designs against it, ourselves included. We then act as a person of
government instead of as a man (non-person) of God’s Creation (Nature). For though a person
(status) always re-presents a man in Þction, a man is never actually that person. Persons are always
Þctional creations; the pre-tended, artful character a man portrays to escape his duty to God and
Nature.

To be clear, the only difference between a natural person and an artiÞcial person (corporation) is
that a corporation is wholly a creation or “creature” of the law, whereas the natural person is a man
acting under the shelter of a legal personhood (status). Both are creations (Þctions) of law, but the
artiÞcial person has no choice. A corporation cannot leave the legal realm it was created in, whereas
man may quitclaim his person.

And so I offer this, my own work freely to all men as a Pure, unqualiÞed, and simple gift under the
principles of that Highest Law of Nature, even as so recognized by legal curators, to those who
seek the knowledge presented inside. I do so without agenda and without design or intent against
any established form of government, for this work is in no way being offered to any type of person
(legal status) of or under any nation. As ignorance and lies are the only tools of externally sourced
mind control (govern-ment) over men, this work is offered only for the spiritual enlightenment of
my fellow man seeking that very narrow path out of this Þctional matrix of legal words and lies.

And so with clarity and some trepidation, I must reveal here just how this work may be obtained as
a Pure and simple gift by those who seek an actual copy in book-like format. For printed copies in
that general book-like form we are all familiar with, and as a token exchange in the form of a Pure
gift of any privately utilized currency or other thing, all of which to a spiritual man under God are
foreign in Nature and useless but to the possible Reality it may falsely represent, the party to the
exchange must know and acknowledge that this will not be in any way a legally considered or
protected exchange nor a taxable or tax-deductible one, and will be completely without (not inside
of) the ÒUnited StatesÓ as a corporation, district, and/or jurisdiction and/or any other political
(legal, commercial, international, and interstate) jurisdiction, taking place in a purely private
modality without any public or other artiÞce or protections. No false, legally established peace and
security should be construed, and no legal protections or insurances. With regard to this work, I am
not a ÒnaturalÓ or ÒartiÞcialÓ taxable thing, person, or entity and neither is this work. I am no thing
at all. I am not acting in any legal or other form of personhood or legal name or title in its creation,
giving freely this work as a Pure and simple gift to any who ask without expectation, qualiÞcation,
or condition, and with absolutely all rights reserved. I am only a True religious man acting in Real
Piety when regarded in any way in consideration of this work as deÞned within. I am not in any
way valued in any artiÞce, money, or other valuable consideration, and neither is this work to be
valued in any such artful, empty legal form. There is no public sales tax required or collected
because this work is not for sale under any government permission, request, public license, or as
legal evidence in publicity, and under no conditions or circumstances should it be construed
otherwise. If for whatever reason someone desiring to acquire this work in its printed ÒbookÓ
format cannot offer such a similar gift to myself in free will without consideration and without
expectation, this (digital) copy is given freely in good will, conscious, honor, and trust, with no
expectation of future reciprocation or renumeration of any valuable consideration, Real or Þat, in
any form or modality. No obligation for future payment or return is to be construed in any way,
shape, or form by the free sharing of this private work in any format or form given by its author,
nor by any gifts or donations given or received. It carries no valuation or Òface value,Ó thus it
cannot be commercially considered or sold. It displays no price or mark. It is priceless as God and
thus myself intended all things to be. It cannot be purchased through any means, legal or other, and
is not for sale. It, and the time I have privately put into its creation, is my own sacriÞce and
represents only my own private duty to my fellow man under the Highest Law of Nature.

This work is not copyrighted and is never to be considered taxed or registered as a publication
under any government permission or license. As a living, sentient and spiritual being acting only
under the Laws of GodÕs Nature I choose in my election to make this work free to all who seek it;
free from government exaction (extortion and/or taxation) and free from the conformity of

!44
publishing house editors, limitations, and censorship. However, this work is not to be considered
or confused as being ever within any legal form of that which is misleadingly called as the “public
domain.” That seemingly innocent domain is merely another legal term meaning the legal, Þctional
realm (dominion) of the legal law and control (Þctional jurisdiction) of government, and I do not
concede or consent to the public’s ownership of my God-given christian name or of my own private
labor and works.

If I were to ÒpublishÓ this work as a legally bound ÒbookÓ in binding, I would only be able to do so
under a legal surname (title) or other Þctitious name (pen name), and only by a marked number as
legal coding, which does not belong to me. Thus my work would become the conveyed property of
government (owner of the public works and all in that domain) to which my Þctional (legal) estate
(incorporated surname) would be assigned the beneÞt of mere use and proÞt until my certiÞed civil
(artiÞcial, legal) death or imprisonment, at which time this work would ultimately become the sole
and perfected property of government (also known as “the public”), existing only according to its
own will and artiÞcial law, whereas those ÒrightsÓ may be re-assigned to another Þctional estate
and thus limited in its availability, or shelved and hidden from the private and public view of
others as so many important works of history have been and are being clandestinely destroyed in a
virtual burning. This is the true and corrupt nature of that seemingly free “public domain,” as we
will discuss, and this work is and forever shall be no part of that adversarial legal Þction. Its Nature
is Free, un-enfranchised, unregistered, and so untaxed (without tribute or burden). That which is
Free under God needs no artiÞcial means or false legal protections or permissions to Exist. Its
Existence is self-evident. I need not legally prove it to any man in false legal title, for it has no legal
capacity (no pretended, Þctional existence) and neither does its author as to its regard.

One might Þnd this to be a strange sentiment, simply because that same man (male or female)
acting and thinking in and as an unequally sexed “public person” in bond and surety of a surname
not his or her own and with induced and reeducated public-mindedness would certainly self-
identify him or her self as part of Òthe public.Ó I do not, for I choose not to be a slave to Þction. My
election is sure. I am that I am, and am not what I am not. If every individual man quit claiming to
be and legally (artiÞcially) appearing as a Þctional person (strawman) of and under government,
the Òpublic domainÓ would still ONLY remain inside of that legal, artiÞcial realm of the property
and jurisdiction of government, as would all controlled government granted copyrights and
patents, for none of these Exist in Reality. In other words, they are not self-existent Creations of
God, not grounded in Nature or Its Law. Nothing of what man calls as legal (Þctional) property is
of God, for property is only a ßattering title, and all such titles in Þction are forbidden by the
Creator and Its Law. Legal government doesnÕt actually Exist except on paper and in the imagi-
nations of men who will kill to religiously protect its Þctional (false) existence. Legal government
can only govern legal things, and the scriptures tell us clearly to be no thing. We are not to allow our
True Selves to be pre-tended to be some legal, Þctional thing we are not. This is one of those
unbreakable, foundational Laws of God, and without that negative foundation (to be no thing), all
is lost.

With no military, no force could be used to justify this legalized piracy of all common men, and
lawmakers and administrative judges would have no weight behind their decisions and opinions
(empty words of art). For none of these are Reality, merely part of the big legal lie that enslaves the
minds of most men in a virtual pirate cove run by legalized pirates that have clandestinely and
through the trickery of word-magic stolen our private works through publication and false
protectionism.

—=—

“It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled.”
—Mark Twain

—=—

!45
A public patent holds no authority in the private hands of spiritual men, only in the public, dead
hands of legal entities. For these are merely Þctions of law (empty words) attached only to the
surname of man’s registered and assigned person-hood in citizenship and estate, not to man him-
self. Patents are purely an object of greed in mammon. Their only purpose is to protect man’s
acting legal persona in the commercial, legal systems of mammon, in the proÞts gained by his
works through the tainted surname of government, using its created and monopolized money and
royalty structure to deny all others in need your gift of knowledge. Of course, a private use of
anything cannot be protected by anything man creates, even that artful law of copyrights and
patents. Patents and copyrights only protect a public person in the selling for proÞt and gain of his
works by others in the public legal realm. They are purely tools of mammon and no other. This is to
say that any private man may recreate any patented or copyrighted idea if his intention is purely of
Charity and Love. If his intent is not to sell or acquire gain in mammon, in government issued and
protected currency, then no patent need exist. They only protect money, usury, gain, and proÞts in
the legal jurisdiction. And so for myself and my work, knowing what I know and choosing to act in
the Purest of intent, I need nor claim no such protections and securities from any Þctional govern-
ment, and restrict all legal government scripts of money from touching or attaching to this work in
any way from every corner of GodÕs earth or of manÕs Þctional realms (jurisdictions). In other
words, I am Naturally free Ñ a feeling likely never experienced by most modern Òpublic-mindedÓ
men who cannot by legal law know or act under Charity and Love in its Highest substance and
protective Law. I seek no license or permission to act and give freely of myself, for IÔm acting under
no one else's Þctional persona (status in law). My soul is simply not for sale. Neither is this work.

ArtiÞce and legal Þction can only exist and be attached to artiÞcial, legal things, of which man is not
and never can be. Legal surnames (the last name) and titles are legal creations of that legal Þction of
law. So why would I create such a work, such a labor of intentional and mutual Love and devotion
to my fellow man in warning against such an artiÞce as this, only to place it under a Þctitious
strawman name that belongs to that same unloving, artiÞcial thing such as any legal government
and its gods (magistrates), as if a Real man did not commit the action of its creation and labor?

No legal name actually owns this work, for these Þctional names are not part of actuality, of the
Reality of Nature. A legal name is only ever a registered (taxed) property of some government, the
creator god of legal persons, places, and things (nouns/names). It is declared here and for all times
that no legal name should ever be permitted to own this work by any pretended legal authority. It
is as a white stone passed from hand to hand, a tool to be used by all who wish to utilize its power
and subsequent knowledge. Possession does not imply ownership, only Natural, private use and
enjoyment. No easement of any type whatsoever should be construed by these statements, and no
proÞts should be taken from it under any circumstances without express (written) permission by its
creator (my Self) and only without legal formality. If anyone wishes to reproduce this work in
ÒbookÓ or any other form whatsoever without any implied ownership, patent, or copyright
because of that action, please contact the author and speak plainly in your intent. However, no
permission or right whatsoever, public or private, should be construed in any form by these
statements. Use this work freely but never claim ownership through purchase or other means, for
this work is unconquerable. This is the way of the spiritual man in his spiritual works, and in all
ways and in all endeavors this is what we all must become. To this end, this is my Þrst big stepÉ

Upon the (artiÞcial) civil death of a Þctional person named Clint Richardson, occurring either in
criminalization and especially in the case of my (its agentÕs) voluntary abjuration of any and all
legal Þction realms, the perceived status of this work will never change, for it is and never will be
attached to that legal entity. It will remain private, for it was never designed or intended to be
published in that public realm where only Þctions exist and legally (artiÞcially) subsist. Upon my
actual (Natural/Physical) death, this work is at that point and for all time to be considered as a
work and principal property of Jehovah (ÒGodÓ) as speciÞcally deÞned herein, and for all time
heretofore and hereafter free to all and restricted by no government or other legal or real entity or
agency thereof, as the property of no man or person but my Self and my posterity and all who seek
to protect it from such legal atrocities. No legal status shall ever be assigned to this work. This work
is never to be considered in any way or format as the property of any other man, person, agent,

!46
principal, sovereignty, or any other living and/or Þctional entity Existing or non-existent, Real or
artful. These legal entities and idolators may attempt to burn and erase every copy, but I have faith
that my fellow, spiritually oriented man may preserve and protect what is revealed herein. The
right of copy and distribution shall never be owned or claimed by any government, man, or person
of any government or of any private State, held only by myself privately and without artiÞce,
which is to say that no man or legal entity may ever hold said right or privy in limitation of any
other man under any law or title, just or unjust, de jure, de facto, or de Gracia.

This preface is to be considered as evidence, legal or otherwise, in every possible case whatsoever,
of my (as the original authorÕs) last (Þnal and unchanging) will and testament as it pertains to this
work. If you have questions as to the meaning of all this, simply ask. It’s not as complicated as you
might think. Or continue reading and discover just what this legal system truly re-presents. This is
not a disclaimer in or under any of man’s systems of art and law, this is the making of law under
the equitableness and authority of God’s Nature as the highest authority and power. This is a direct
line and appeal to the Highest Law and Purest intent possible.

As for this very large tome of research and discourse, to call this work as a “pamphlet” would of
course be incorrect, considering both its shear magnitude of size and the fact that its author is not
sufÞciently skilled in that ability to speak so eloquently as to constrict his thoughts into such
brilliantly short but concise packages. For this I must humbly apologize to the reader. However, in
the case of this particular work, such size restrictions would ultimately be an impossibility. For it is
meant to be as much of a compilation and reference on the alternative language of law and of
scripture as it is to be a guidepost for the readerÕs own navigation through such artiÞces (evils) of
Þction, and also of those parables of spiritual choice. It is an encyclopedic dictionary, a walk-
through of the language that enslaves us. A short pamphlet certainly cannot teach one a new
language, only utilizing it in a limited capacity and understanding. Therefore, it has been indexed
as such, though no index will be available for the (.pdf or other digital) format. In this way only are
these two versions different.

If you are somehow “purchasing” this work from a public or private “book store” or from any
other incorporation, person, man, business, or venue, then they are to hopefully be commended for
this action. There is no sale or wholesale price attached to this work for the purposes of resale
elsewhere. It cannot be tracked or purchased from myself as a sale or wholesale product in any
commercial way or without my permission, as it is my will that it shall not exist in that legal,
commercial realm; instead to remain always a private work available to all at no cost as a pure and
simple gift. If you have found this work unused and available anywhere but from my own garage,
then I must have had a personal interaction with someone who wished to share this work in its
“book” format as one would share a pamphlet; or in modern times a DVD or other digital handout
through activism. Please ensure that this is the case before supporting any such monetary trans-
actions with pirates. If through one’s business one wishes to “sell” this work, please contact me and
speak from the soul without artiÞce or ill intent, and be prepared to offer a Purely private gift in
good conscious and unattached to this work, without any form of corporate intercourse or in any
commercial name, receipt, insurance, tax write-offs, consumer or corporate protections, or any
other pretense so that I may cover my own costs and labor when offering this work as a free gift.
For I no longer choose to operate in that artiÞcial world of commerce, which is and always has been
nothing but human trafÞcking through the theft of the ideas and labors of men to support that
system of mammon for the beneÞt of the few. Only private gifts will be received without expected
consideration, and this work will only be given as a Pure and simple gift to whom I privately
choose.

This statement should not be misconstrued to mean that I give consent or permission to reproduce
this work in any form or format within or without any Þctional realm; only that this Þnished work
as obtained only from me (I Am) under only my private christian name may be given or traded
away to others with only good and Pure intent and without legal and commercial considerations.
No man, person, or other Þction of law shall have any right to copyright or reproduce this work

!47
under any government jurisdiction or authority for proÞt without express written permission from
myself; that is, the actual me (I AM) without any legal consideration, Þctional law, and persona.

I also hope to have a recorded audio version available some time after the release of this work, to
which the same conditions will apply. However, I again stress the importance of this work as an
indexed reference guide in its unpublished, indexed, Òbook-likeÓ form. For who knows how long
that artiÞcial, digital world will last, or how long it will allow works like this to be shared in such
an impermanent, artiÞcially fragile digital form and domain? If any reader wishes to spend the
time creating an index or other compendium for this free digital work the author would be glad to
share that with all others as well.

Lastly, and to be perfectly clear, this work is meant above all else to be shared. Just ask and ye shall
receive. I cannot force anyone to be honest and with integrity ensure some form of gift or charity to
myself, the laborer of this work, nor do I have any expectation of such an act. I can only ask that the
current holder of it in whatever form consider the great pain and suffering (many years of study
and learning at my own expense, career, loss of friends and of health) that went into this creation
with the sole motive and intent of beneÞting any and all who may acquire it, and the desire to
continue doing so with other future works while being able to also eat and have shelter. Therefore,
if indeed this writing within brings enlightenment, enjoyment, and awakening, I ask your help in
perhaps contributing in Pure and Simple Charity to my future ability to continue to create such free
works so that all who seek may acquire. But under no circumstances should this request be
mistaken to mean that this work should not Þrst and foremost be (digitally) shared freely and
selßessly in its original (.pdf) format. Play it forwardÉ

For no man is truly free until all men are free.

I may be incorrect, but printing this work off will likely be way more expensive than acquiring the
printed book privately from myself. However, if the holder of this work chooses to do so, the same
law applies. Always act charitably and play it forward, and never sell this work for proÞt and gain.
For this would be a stain upon its intent and a slap in the face of its author.

As for the contents of this work, the author apologizes for the fact that the shear nightmarish
magnitude of information covered within (and in future volumes) can only be presented like a
massive connect-the-dots puzzle. Ironically, as a presentation of the pitfalls inherent in the
construction of the artful legal language itself, where we must deÞne all legal terms as compared to
the very same common word-terms as shown herein, this was the challenge of a lifetime. I am
exhausted. And so for the readerÕs beneÞt, please trust in the authorÕs Þnal work as a whole,
despite my sometimes purposefully repetitive ramblings, for the language as used herein is also
being dualistically deÞned on the spot, while at the same time being constructed into teaching
sentences, all of which correlate to all other parts. Never forget that we are brainwashed (governed)
through repetition, be it through public education, music, entertainments, or through political
rhetoric (words of artiÞce) and the daily Ònews.Ó We certainly learn through repetition, and so no
apology is offered for my own use of it within this work. My intention is not deception but
enlightenment. As above, so below; for all legal words interconnect with each other, a circular trap
of deceit and trickery bound only by the respected Reality and Law of Nature.

Could I tell you how all dots connect with each other if I do not come back to the same dot in
repetition and in relationship to all other possible dots? The literalist considers linearly, as the path
laid out in a concect-the-dots puzzle for children. The spiritual mind considers all possibilities and
makes a moral choice based upon the law (and thus god) he follows. To educate is to use repetition
to force the learning of useless knowledge of Þctional things and their names. To teach, as to
enlighten, is to be able to connect all the dots as the self-evident Truth. The author aspires to the
latter, regrettably failing where I may. But I say here that what I repeat I attempt to connect to
another dot at least incrementally, until all the multitude of connected dots form an accurate,
veriÞable picture or story, where the sum of all ideas make up the whole without defect.

!48
Nothing is ambiguous in the legal intent and deÞnition of words (terms of art). The art of manÕs
law cannot exist as and in anti-Nature without being described and deÞned into a false existence by
speciÞcally authorized words any more than a painting can exist without paint or a stone sculpture
without the stone. Thus a concept used in the beginning of this work may not be comprehended or
fully deÞned or deciphered until the end of this work. This is to say that we all must become aware
of the secretive meaning and intent of the legal (usually Þgurative) version of all words, which not
only accompanies our general, common English language in a frighteningly misleading similitude,
but in fact appears, sounds like, and is spelled exactly the same as our everyday conversational
vernacular. Every Matrix is created to appear as the same, but is only a virtual form of Reality
designed to deceive. Legality is like cellophane wrapped over everything we see, causing all things
to be invisibly re-deÞned by legal names and title (proprietary words). Yet I assure you that these
are two separate languages despite their seeming perfection of similitude. Dismiss nothing. The
literal (Real) and the Þgurative (legal/artiÞcial) seldom carry the same interpretation. The trap-
pings of this dualistic, esoteric word magic is not meant to cause Freedom.

Before we move on, this point must be under-stoodÉ

All words are a lie. All words are a representation of something, whether it be a Truth or Þction. A
representation, no matter how accurate, is never a Truth in and of itself. Words are never self-
Evident Truth. All words are thus magical by their nature. One does not need to imagine a rabbit
being pulled out of a black top-hat as a magic trick (action) to be mature enough to grasp this
concept (words). A word is always a creation of man, without exception. In all of Nature we must
never confuse a (re)creation of man with a Creation of God. We must never mistake Source with
resource. We must realize that invention is never Origin. There are no Sources but Natural Sources,
and no resources may be raped or manufactured that do not have the Seal of Jehovah (Nature)
upon them, even when mixed unnaturally. Source (Truth) never changes, even when manipulated
and mixed to appear as resource (invention). Man is never the Creator of what is Real, and this is
most importantly so when it comes to words. The name placed upon a substance is not substance
itself. A name is neither part of any substance nor necessary for its Existence. All that is in self-
Existence, which some call collectively as the Oneness of God (Jehovah), does not Exist or not Exist
because man came up with a word to call each part of the Whole. And so we must always
remember not to place the value of Truth upon any word we read or hear. No word should be
placed into an authority in our minds that is greater in power and will than that for which the
word is imagined to be attached to. This is the path of the fool, and all these words are used to
manipulate us like puppet strings. For we have all been made fools by them. We can verify this
simply by listening to popular culture and media, and for that matter just about everywhere we
may go in public. For there we will undoubtedly Þnd the strangest of all oddities, so normalized
into societal form and functionality that we barely even question it anymore, that being the
continuous battle of words between men. In other words, a battle of truths. My words are more
truer than yours. No, my words make your words ridiculous. No, my words make me right and
you wrong. No, I am telling the truth.

And so we Þnd a battle of words in perpetuity, from actors that are members and followers of other
parishioners of magical spellings that provide them with news, entertainment, and information, but
again only through words (lies). We live falsely (unnaturally) by re-presentation. And so magically
weÕre all now arguing with each other over what is Truth, because we seem to have forgotten the
foundational rule that Truth is only what is Real, what is of Nature, what is a Creation of God, and
nothing else. We have forgotten that Truth Exists self-evidently, never needing our passions of
offense or defense to Exist in Source. We have forgotten that Truth is everything we havenÕt re-
created and repurposed. What is True is not up for debate, unless that truth is a false doctrine or
cultural meme created by man that can never actually be the Truth in the Reality of Nature. And so,
though the words of any man will never change the Truth, we must be aware that the magical effect
of words can alter the appearance and perception of what is Truth to the point where we have
talked ourselves right out of Reality. But the Law of Nature is to Live by and respect the Truth in
and of all things and to protect It as such. Thus we Þnd ourselves living paradoxically, our minds
caught between two dimensions of existence, one artiÞcial and instantly valuable and changeable

!49
and one Real in its Permanence and Law. Some call this as the darkness and the Light, a battle
between God (Reality/Nature/self-evident Truth) and satan (artiÞce/Þction/lies), both of which
are battling for the title of truth. But whatever we call it, we must Þrst and foremost recognize it is
happening and effecting us all in exceedingly more threatening and technologically (artfully)
advanced ways.



This clashing of Reality and Þction in a title-Þght for the label of truth in the minds of men is why
the Þctional world was created. It is the reason for word magic, the purpose of the artiÞcers and
illusionists of church and state. And this battle, of course, is why the legal language was conceived,
to create a man-made, Þctional realm of lies that stands both in similarity (but not sameness) to and
also in direct opposition (adversary) to the Truth or all things. Through words alone man is kept
from enjoying his Truth Nature. Through words alone man’s mind has been short-circuited and
enslaved in a complex legal matrix of conÞrmed and ratiÞed lies.

Remember that towards the public, as Manly P. Hall so noted, the gods always speak in verse, in
metaphor, and cause their common subjects to reciprocally speak in prose (literalness) through
public education. It is when poetry (art) can be hidden behind what appears to be common prose
that its verse carries the most magic, manipulating us all without conscious awareness of its rhyme
or reason, into a despotic disharmony of false conceptualization.

To be clear, and as we will show with detail later in this work, it is perfectly legal to lie to the public
(off the record) because “the public” does not actually Exist in any individual capacity. The public
is not a man. It is a non-entity, a magic word used indiscriminately to address and pretend to give
legal notice to all persons (property) of government at once. It requires no response and no oath or
swearing in to tell the truth. Of course, there is no actual Truth in the Þction of politics. In fact, in
grammar, we generally separate what is True and what is Þction by the words Natural and political.
So how can a political creation, a politician, lie to the public, when both of those words represent
that which is not Real? How can a lie tell a lie, when that lie (politician) only legally (anti-Truth)
exists in the Þctional place (Þctional, legal jurisdiction) it was created from? How does a politician
lie when everything it does is in the Þctional, legal realm? For in Þction, every legally created lie is
a truth.

POLITICIAN - adjective - CUNNING; USING ARTIFICE. - noun - One versed in THE

SCIENCE of government and THE ART OF GOVERNING; ONE SKILLED IN POLITICS. 1.
A MAN OF ARTIFICE OR DEEP CONTRIVANCE. (Webs1828)

POLITICAL - adjective - [supra.]… 3. ARTFUL; SKILLFUL. [See Politic.] (Black 4)

—=—

Inversely, however, a single ÒmemberÓ of the public is not allowed (licensed) to lie to government
(on the record). Thus we are spoken to not individually but in poetic verse, lie after stinking lie, by
puppets reading the word-smithed rhetoric of master speech-writers. If you can imagine the devil
reading poetry (a speech) to teach an anti-moral lesson, then you may know the speech of the
politician. It is not the words or verse that is tainted, but the spirit of intent.


—=—

“Poetry is the universal art of the spirit which has become free in itself and
WHICH IS NOT TIED DOWN FOR ITS REALIZATION TO EXTERNAL
SENSUOUS MATERIAL; instead, it launches out exclusively in THE INNER
SPACE AND THE INNER TIME OF IDEAS AND FEELINGS.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

—=—

!50
Let us explore the meanings of these words so as to understand the importance of their usage,
remembering that the Bible is in verse, as were the words of christ.

PROSE - noun - s as z. [Latin prosa.] 1. The NATURAL LANGUAGE of man; LANGUAGE

LOOSE AND UNCONFINED TO POETICAL MEASURE, AS OPPOSED TO VERSE OR
METRICAL COMPOSITION. Things unattempted yet in prose or rhyme. 2. A prayer used in
the Romish church on particular days. - verb transitive - To write in prose. 1. To make a
tedious RELATION. (Webs1828)

PROSAIC - adjective - s as z. [Latin prosaicus, from prosa, prose.] Pertaining to prose;

resembling prose; NOT RESTRICTED BY NUMBERS; applied to writings; as a prosaic
composition. (Webs1828)

VERSE - noun - vers. [Latin versus; verto, TO TURN.]… 2. Poetry; METRICAL LANGUAGE.
VIRTUE WAS TAUGHT IN VERSE. Verse embalms virtue. 3. A short division of any
composition, particularly of THE CHAPTERS IN THE SCRIPTURES. The author of the
division of the Old Testament into verses, is not ascertained. The New Testament was divided
into verses by Robert Stephens. 4. A piece of poetry. - verb transitive - TO TELL IN VERSE;
TO RELATE POETICALLY. Playing on pipes of corn, and versing love. To be versed, [Latin
vesor.] TO BE WELL SKILLED; TO BE ACQUAINTED WITH; as, to be versed in history or in
geometry. (Webs1828)

LEGIST - noun - One skilled in the laws. (Webs1828)

POETIZE - verb intransitive - To write as a poet; to compose VERSE. (Webs1828)

VERSIFIER - noun - 1. One who makes verses. NOT EVERY VERSIFIER IS A POET. 2. One
who converts into verse; or ONE WHO EXPRESSES THE IDEAS OF ANOTHER, written in
prose; as, Dr. Watts was a versiÞer of the Psalms. (Webs1828)

VERSIFICATION - noun - The ACT, ART OR PRACTICE of composing POETIC VERSE.

VersiÞcation is THE RESULT OF ART, LABOR AND RULE, rather than of invention or the
Þre of genius. It consists in adjusting the long and short syllables, and forming feet into
harmonious measure. (Webs1828)

VERSION - noun - [Latin versio.] 1. A TURNING; A CHANGE OR TRANSFORMATION; as

the version of air into water. [Unusual.] 2. Change of direction; as the version of the beams of
light. [Unusual.] 3. THE ACT OF TRANSLATING; THE RENDERING OF THOUGHTS OR
IDEAS EXPRESSED IN ONE LANGUAGE, INTO WORDS OF LIKE SIGNIFICATION IN
ANOTHER LANGUAGE. How long was Pope engaged in the version of Homer? 4.
Translation; that which is rendered from another language. We have a good version of the
Scriptures. There is a good version of Pentateuch in Samaritan. The Septuagint version of the
Old Testament was made for the beneÞt of the Jews in Alexandria. (Webs1828)

METRICAL - adjective - [Latin metricus.] 1. Pertaining to measure, or due arrangement or

combination of long and short syllables. 2. Consisting of verses; as metrical compositions.
(Webs1828)

MEASURE - noun - mezh’ur. [Latin mensura, from mensus, with a casual n, the participle of
metior, to measure; Eng. to mete.] 1. The whole extent or dimensions of a thing, including
length, breadth and thickness. The measure thereof is longer than the earth and broader than
the sea. Job 11:9. It is applied also to length or to breadth separately. 2. That by which extent or
dimension is ascertained, either length, breadth, thickness, CAPACITY, or amount; as, a rod
or pole is a measure of Þve yards and a half; an inch, a foot, a yard, are measures of length; a
gallon is a measure of capacity. Weights and measures should be uniform. Silver and gold are
the common measure of value. 3. A limited or deÞnite quantity; as a measure of wine or beer.

!51
 4. Determined extent or length; limit. Lord, make me to know my end, and the measure of my
days. Psalms 39:4. 5. A rule by which any thing is adjusted or proportioned. God's goodness
is the measure of his providence. 6. Proportion; quantity settled. I enter not into the
particulars of the law of nature, or its measures of punishment; yet there is such a law. 7.
Full or sufÞcient quantity. I'll never pause again, Till either death hath clos'd these eyes of
mine, Or fortune given me measure of revenge. 8. EXTENT OF POWER OR OFFICE. We will
not boast of things without our measure. 2 Corinthians 10:13. 9. Portion allotted; EXTENT OF
ABILITY… 10. Degree; quantity indeÞnite… 15. MEANS TO AN END; an act, step or
proceeding towards the accomplishment of an object; an extensive signiÞcation of the word,
applicable to almost every act preparatory to a Þnal end, and by which it is to be attained.
Thus we speak of legislative measures, political measures, public measures, prudent measures,
a rash measure effectual measures, inefÞcient measuresÉ - verb transitive - mezhÕur. To
compute or ascertain extent, quantity, dimensions OR CAPACITY BY A CERTAIN RULE;
as, to measure land; to measure distance; to measure the altitude of a mountain; TO
MEASURE THE CAPACITY OF A SHIP or of a cask. 1. To ascertain the degree of any thing;
as, to measure the degrees of heat, or of moisture… 3. To judge of distance, extent or quantity;
as, to measure any thing by the eye. GREAT ARE THY WORKS, JEHOVAH, INFINITE THY
POWER; WHAT THOUGHT CAN MEASURE THEE? 4. To adjust; to proportion. To secure a
contended spirit, MEASURE YOUR DESIRES BY YOUR FORTUNES, NOT YOUR
FORTUNES BY YOUR DESIRES. 5. To allot or distribute by measure. With what measure ye
mete, it shall be measured to you again. Matthew 7:2. (Webs1828)

METE - verb transitive - [Latin metior; Hebrew, to measure.] To measure; to ascertain quantity,
dimensions or capacity by any rule or standard. [Obsolescent.] - noun - Measure; limit;
boundary; used chießy in the plural, in the phrase, metes and bounds. (Webs1828)

METER - noun - [from mete.] One who measures; used in compounds, as in coal-meter, land-
meter. (Webs1828)

—=—

Remember that this word “natural,” as used above to describe prose as being the “natural language
of man,” is not a reference to anything in Nature. Words are not part of Creation, and are certainly
not self-Existent. The term natural here is instead a legal reference to the lowest, vulgar, illiterate,
idiot nature of man without cultivation and civilization into elitist status.

This means to not be well-versed in the law. The municipal and US Codes are certainly written in
numbered sections, as are dictionaries (cyphers), as quite shortened and concise versions of the
whole. Mere literalist prose is not restricted or limited by numbers nor by previous verbiage. Prose
has no purposeful rhyme or reason. But we may also begin to comprehend the endless loop of pain
and suffering that is caused by the legal system, a system 100% based upon the administration and
justiÞcation of judging others through Þction.To have such a legal (anti-christ) privilege to judge,
we must Þrst submit the surname for which we are already judged (doomed) by at birth. This for-
proÞt system of the organization of petty judgement and reward in mammon goes against all
teachings of christ, seeking an intermediary magistrate god to intervene where the Highest Law
states never to enter, into a house of inequity, where forgiveness is measured as an unproÞtable sin.

—=—

“Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye
shall be judged: AND WITH WHAT MEASURE YE METE, IT SHALL BE
MEASURED TO YOU AGAIN.”
—Matthew 7:1-2, KJB

—=—

!52
 —=—

“…as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall
RETURN upon thine own head.”
—Obadiah 1:15, KJB

—=—

Remember, one’s just reward is not always a good thing, any more than one’s own actions towards
others are always good. And so the Golden Rule is be good to all men so that one’s reward is
always steeped in Loving and Charitable gladness, as is the anointment of christ. To call this as
anything but a perfectly reasonable, Natural Law, or to dismiss it as mere religiosity, is an
admonishment that can only be made by a man lost in his own foolish, selÞsh conceit. For to him,
the Golden Rule is to acquire more gold than anyone else, and that he with the most gold makes
the rules.

I am constantly amazed that most people can reasonably, through logical fallacy, contemplate that
there can indeed be more than one version of what is the Truth. Talk radio and news stations pride
themselves in the fact that their hosts speak with different and opposing opinions from one
another, claiming that all views are covered. But what does this really mean? It can mean no other
thing than only one or possibly none of those hosts is speaking in actual Truth. For Truth doesnÕt
come in a multi-pack of ßavors and colors. It has no sides or versions. It is Truth (Reality/Nature)
or it isn’t. Of course, words are never Truth, only representations of Truth. The problem is that we
are born into a system of lies that are adjudged and called as the truths, and we believe in the
existence of that legal matrix of artful words as if it were Reality. We respect the power of the word
over the Reality it represents. And so even the measure of this legal word truth has no limitations
within its meaning, being that which is declared and professed by man’s consensus or judgement,
not what is self-evident and self-Existent (of Nature/Source).

Guttural slang, ironically, is measured by the typical publicly educated, middle-class, “natural-
born” goyim in public citizen-ship as less than proper and beneath the well-entrained dog-Latin we
are taught to bark by public institutions. We emotionally judge others below us even as we are
legally, ofÞcially judged by those above us by our own mongrel usage of ÒcorrectÓ English. For just
as the Bible warns in its poetic verse: let ye not judge another lest ye be judged yourself. The term
“correct English” is of course an oxymoron, a non sequitur, having no source or point of reference
for such a description. I suppose from the devil’s perspective that when one speaks in correct
English they are fulÞlling their duties to that god of legal lies and grammar, for legal is always
opposed to Reality. The antonyms for correct include biased, false, imprecise, improper, inaccurate,
invalid, wrong, ßawed, inappropriate, inexact, and unÞtting, all of which just happen to describe
the lower-class of public citizen-ship in the eyes of God and the Natural Law. We might call this as
legal or political correctness, where it is illegal to label anything by its harsh Truth. Caught up like
Þsh in a net, we revel in our ability to speak the illiterate prose of the English, dog-Latin language
and even seek degrees in education (a ßattering title of measure) to be expert professors of that
idiot-speak, luring each new generation into our own collective net like schools of blind Þsh, so
proud of our vain accomplishments. In the end, we are so utterly limited in our capacity to see and
Love the Natural World through a poetic, spiritual eye that our words are completely detached
from it as we personify and anthropomorphize all the world into terms of art in the third (legal)
person.

Etymology also, as the supposed origin of all words, cannot account for the source of these artful,
redeÞned legal alterations of every word when used in Þction as terms of any speciÞc art. Any legal
form is always that which is opposed to Reality and Nature. What is Legal is therefore that which
stands only in Þction as art, as that which is opposed to, in the stead of, or in the place of God (what
is of Nature). Fiction and Þctional (legal) languages have no rules except those created by their
legal, artful creators (legal gods). And so an appeal to the etymological origin of any word to

!53
disprove the legal meaning of that same word as a totally separate term of art in a totally different
jurisdiction (place) is unfortunately a pure fallacy of logic. It would be like using the actual forest to
disprove an artful painting of the forest. The creator of the painting was not trying to replace
Reality with his art in the Þrst place, only to bypass and control it, and so the argument is void of
reason or purpose. Do not confuse etymology with terms of art (Þction). For while etymology is
ambiguous to all who use it in common, legal words are intentional property of the artist that re-
created and re-purposed them. An author copyrights the order of his words and ideas, but has no
power to call as property the meaning of those words. The author of legalese is not you, for you are
merely acting as a character in the state's commercial realm of Þction. So please get this through
your headÉ You do not get to deÞne or re-deÞne any of the terms of any of the gods. Your use of
the legal language offers no ownership or property in those words of art. It is you who are playing
the part of the art, and so you are bound by the meanings of those words that govern artiÞce. And
it is those same proprietary words that were used to create your strawman.

ETYMOLOGY - See Dictionary. LEGISLATIVE LANGUAGE IS TO BE RECEIVED, NOT

NECESSARILY ACCORDING TO ITS ETYMOLOGICAL MEANING, BUT ACCORDING
TO ITS PROBABLE ACCEPTANCE, AND ESPECIALLY IN THE SENSE IN WHICH THE
LEGISLATURE IS ACCUSTOMED TO USE THE SAME WORDS. Illustrated in the
expression to "connect" railroad tracks of different gauges. THE COURTS CONSTRUE
WORDS ACCORDING TO THE COMMON PARLANCE OF THE COUNTRY. Hence, a
corporation engaged in removing petroleum from place to place is a “transportation"
company. See STATUTE. (WCA1889)

—=—

And so again we see that legal words are terms of a speciÞc place (jurisdiction), are terms of a
speciÞc art (legal law), and are thus deÞned not by their original source (etymology) but by the
gods that repurposed them into that artful (ofÞcial) use. Words are the re-sources of dictators. In
other words, you will be seen as an utter fool if you speak etymologically to a judge the words of
the legal art and language. Their only similarity is their spelling. That’s where the Truth ends and
the legal lie begins. And this is where the reader of this work must set aside his or here beliefs
(loves) in the veracity of any word, for our strict belief system is the only thing that stands in the
way of attaining knowledge. And the most important Truth is that in the legal or any other realm of
art, you have no control over the meanings of words, especially when you are in bond and surety
to a proprietary persona and ßattering title created in that legal or other realm of art. Puppets
(persons) may only speak in their own art form, for that is all the law of persons and its corporate
administrators (gods) recognize. And this is why a person, but not a man, is always a slave. Only
when the man follows the person and binds himself in contract to that person (legal status) can the
man be called as the 13th amendment declares, as one in voluntary servitude or voluntary slavery.
For the choice to act falsely in another's person (property) is always a voluntary, contractual action.
This is as well an obvious, self-evident Truth, but also one of the hardest to contemplate and Þnally
admit. For no one wishes to blame themselves as voluntary participants in making such a legal hell
come to Þctional life. While many lies and adversaries must be faced in Life, it is perhaps the mirror
that is the most dreaded.

You might say that the devil (legal law and its practitioners) has a forked tongue. The devil’s
(adversaryÕs) language uses the same exact words that we do, but each meaning behind this legal
devil-speak is speciÞcally intended and deÞned as the opposite of our common terms of Reality
and Nature. Form without substance. The devil only works in worded contracts, seen and unseen,
written and unwritten, and so we should always expect those legal words to be deceiving in any
form they are presented. Not surprisingly, the royal societies refer to the legal language as the
higher language, and to the common speech as vulgar; only useful for the control of the mass of
illiterates as the nations of goyim. Legalese is the kingÕs language. To the legal societies and religious
sects, illiteracy is merely a lack of juristic and scriptural knowledge, and this publicly imposed
ignorance and trickery is the tool of their general control over we, the common people. Thus, the
common or general language of the common people bounded and burdened by public citizen-ship

!54
is viciously twisted and turned into a language of fraud and deceit in direct opposition to Life,
Law, God, and Nature Itself. This magical spell (the spelling and construction of words) therefore
must Þrst be realized as a state of despotic dualism, where we are intentionally and unwittingly
tripped up on our own false comprehension and wrongful understanding of the meaning of legal
words, as our common everyday words in fact mean the opposite of the True intent under which
we speak them, even while unwittingly acting in a legal capacity (in persona). We are in Rome, and
so we must learn RomeÕs language or be helpless under its deception. This is the realm of legalese
— the legal language — where fantasy and Reality collide to create the jurisdiction of legal law that
so entraps all good men as one body politic under false names (nouns).

And so it is the authorÕs intent with this freely shared work not only to teach, but to instill in the
reader an acute awareness of this shadow of dualism that surrounds and redeÞnes our every
action, and more speciÞcally our very use of words that do not belong to us. If the common
language is good, then the legal language as its opposing force must be considered as evil. It is a
game of destructively opposing nomenclature. Matter vs. anti-matter. Every art form, be it industry,
law, religion, science, medicine, or mathematics has its own terms of art (opposing language) that
only applies to the speciÞc art and jurisdiction of that formal (without substance) realm. Art is
always therefore non-sense, being not veriÞable by the senses.

—=—

It is a safe rule to apply that, when a mathematical or philosophical

author writes with a misty profundity, he is talking NONSENSE.
—Alfred North Whitehead

—=—

A doctor speaks in medical terms of art while a general speaks only the art of war. An attorney
speaks in the artful terms of the emotionless, well-deÞned Þction of law known as legalese, while a
mother speaks with only the truest intent and substance in each uttered sound, with such loving
intent as only can be spoken by the abashedly undeÞned and ambiguous terms of a loving mother,
with no artiÞce or form of art at all Ñ a language of Pure Love and devotion dealing only in the
senses. For no construct of language is ever needed to actually express the sense of True Love. Art
cannot Love. Art cannot feel. Art can only represent in the coldness of Lifeless simulation. And this
notion is why we never comprehend our own failure to communicate with the practitioners of
these various, loveless, Lifeless arts. Practitioners of the legal art speak only in non-sense, relating
only to Þctional things and characters, and using only re-sourced, artful terms. Their languages
sound the same, but are vastly different when their terms are deÞned within each speciÞc,
uncommon art.

Art is artiÞce; artiÞcial; Þction; technology. It is form but never substance, just as a mathematical
equation has nothing to do with the Reality it describes and deÞnes. Numbers are merely Þctional
words on paper that form ideas and give artiÞcial answers that may be then utilized in NatureÕs
artful re-design by men. And so True Love cannot Exist in Þction. Love is vulgar and animalistic to
the legal mind. It is undeÞnable, uncontrollable, indescribable, and therefore It above all else must
be defeated or used as a weapon of inducement to contract.

The sayers and practitioners of each Þctional art create their own unique, formal, ofÞcial language.
We can better comprehend these terms of art if we always remember their temporary, even
proprietary nature, that they can be changed at any time to suit the needs of the state and its courts
(creator gods), and that this is the case simply because those words carry no meaning and describe
nothing in Reality. What is Real self-evidently needs no representation, unless what is attempting
to measure the Real seeks a Þctional consideration and subversion of the Real, and thus desires that
some valuation in mammon be placed upon it. The words of that language alone deÞnes the art.
The creators of the art (Þction) therefore create a Þctional jurisdiction (place) containing the laws of

!55
the art based on its own pre-deÞned terms. Like a cartoon, the art deÞnes the realm where the
cartoon may then pretend to exist in cartoon form, whereas in Nature the Design needs no words of
art to Exist, for all of Life Exists without manÕs artiÞce of language. Thus we may reasonably refer
to Nature as the capitalized word ÒCreationÓ simply because man is not Its Creator but Its helpless
subject, needing Its perfect abundance and balance to survive and subsist. Nature, as the only True
Existence and Force of Life, Exists despite man. Man is a part of that Oneness of Being, and his
actions determine whether or not he will continue to be a harmonious part or an expendable thorn
in Its side. Thus the Highest Law must be the Law of Its Nature, which carries the same meaning as
the Law of God or Law of the Creator, for no other law (doctrine) can have even artiÞcial existence
without Þrst there being a place for man to Exist in Reality. If man dies, so too does his Þctions. But
God's Nature, Life, and Its Law will go on.

And so we may for ease of understanding call anything not created by man as a part of God
(Nature, as the Creation that Is Jehovah). GodÕs Nature is as the Creator of man, not the other way
around. Man is born into Nature (Creation) Þrst as a Living spirit. Only after this Þrst Real breath
(Source) of Life may he then acquire as a contracted dis-ease a Living, spiritual death by being
legally birthed (re-created) into the nations and by consensually, voluntarily conÞrming that status
(person) and following its false law. All creations of man are of artiÞce, being not formed into self-
existence within Nature, and so man may only be the artiÞcial god of his own artiÞcial creation.
And so man must be re-born back into his True Nature, back into Real Life. He must follow the
only Truth and Its Law and remain then untainted by the artiÞcers of legal creation. This, of course,
will be expounded upon greatly in this work. But please know that if this concept of what the word
ÒGodÓ means in Its Highest substance and also in all forms that stand opposed to It is not under-
stood, it will be impossible for any man to escape from that controlled legal (anti-God) opposition
of the many legally enthroned gods of the nations.

The jurisdiction (realms) of each art-form exist only according to the terms of that speciÞc art
without deviation or spill-over into the next. And so as we skip along in a Þctional (dead) legal life
(person) from one artiÞcial jurisdiction to another like the controlled game-piece of a board game,
and from the artful realms and languages of paralegal, medical, scientiÞc, educative, etc., we
generally fail to recognize the source of our confusion and failure to communicate between artful
(artiÞcial) Þctional realms merely because we are publicly educated only to speak the common
language of sensual, natural (hu-man) understanding. Perhaps we may become, in ßattering legal
title, some ÒdoctorÓ or Òscientist,Ó and actually learn some part of the terms of art attached to such
a Þctional profession. We certainly begin to speak differently to other Þctionally titled residents
within that same Þeld of art, but still we cannot communicate with other Þctional characters titled
in different arts. The doctor might not be able to speak at all with the botanist, for instance, though
their Þelds are quite similar. In all cases, however, the man pretending to wear the badge of false,
ßattering title in any of those legally created art forms (professions) must always remember to
speak generally or commonly to the rest of the people not in his pretended world of art, even to his
patients and customers. Among his colleagues, he may ever refer to this process of speaking with-
out art as dumbing down his words, for he forgets that he is the dummy (agent) of what is
completely unnatural and not self-evident.

And so what happens when we attempt to communicate with the agents of the legal realm, such as
the judge, the attorney, and the politician? Like attempting to commune with dead spirits, we fail
by our use of the general language of the realm of the Living to establish any spiritual contact, for
an agent is always spiritually dead in its functionality as property of another. The agent (attorney)
of the legal realm is always under the law of its own false god, the creator of its ßattering title, and
thus having no capacity to hear the words of any terms but that of its own art. All other knowledge
is extraneous to its sole purpose in Þction and commerce. Fictions know only their own language,
and men are controlled by keeping that artful language an open secret, the common multitude
being purposefully educated to be ignorant of the artful language of law that binds us. Our
inherent awareness of Reality interferes with our ability to recognize and thus commune with
artiÞcial things in artiÞcial existence. And while these artful languages are spelled and sound
phonetically the same as our own in common, we might as well be speaking a totally foreign

!56
language. The common, general, vulgar vernacular of language, being the general or default
language of all men, yes even of those who cannot read or write, is what may be deemed as anti-art
and especially as anti-legal. This makes all other artful languages in their expression of Þctional
concepts and ideas as anti-Nature; anti-God; Anti-Life; anti-spirit.

There is only one language that allows any expression of True Love and other Pure emotions
regarding the True substance of Life (Creation). It has no name, known by its feeling and freedom
of expression, and is called in all nations as the “general” or “common” vernacular. It seems that
most people do not stop to think that if there is a common language there must be an uncommon
language as well, otherwise the description of “common” would be pointless and redundant. But
in all nations, it is quite simply that the language of the master (the legally established gods) is
never equal to the language of the subject/slave (the legally established goyim). This common
language is the language of God only because when man speaks it, he does so with sincerity,
recognizing only the Reality of Nature in his untainted words. It carries no deceit in its
conceptualizations, no representations, trickery, or magic spellings, and it places no artiÞcial
valuation upon anything Real. It may subsist only in the Pure of heart, being a language of utter
consciousness and moral Þber unswayed by motives of gain, proÞt, usury, etc. Strangely enough, it
is equally as spiritual as no words at all, for what is spoken of in Pure Truth must necessarily be in
regard to that which is self-evident and self-existent (part of God’s Pure Creation), with no
assignment of any Þctional concept thereof. It is the sound of man spiritually contemplating
everything by Its actual substance and Source, without legalism or other designs against it, and
with no supernatural (above-Truth) authority given to any name. Its use is in pure Honesty,
Charity, and Love, and its intentions thereof are Pure to these ends. Its words seek no harm or
alteration of Reality, and instead embraces and worships everything as it stands in Its own self-
Existence.

But obviously this utopian ideal of language is easily corruptible, especially when Its artful,
adversarial (satanic) form is all but indistinguishable from its Source. Art in and of itself cannot feel
or express anything but pre-rendered judgement and the cold opinions of man within artiÞcially
re-created, strict deÞnitions. Art can only refer to form or status, to Reality in name (noun) only,
and thus never to the actual substance (Nature) of anything. When a cartoon laughs, no Real joy
actually Exists there. But the pure and priceless laughter of a joyous and happy child cannot be
measured in any of manÕs arts, languages, or Þctional designs. Such beautiful happenings in
Nature are self-evident and donÕt need to be faked or legally deÞned or scientiÞcally explained.
Laughter, in other words, though it has no strict spelling or rule of usage, is one of the most Pure
examples of this unnamed general language of God's Word and Law. The Law of God is to preserve
Love and Live Purely and unblemished, not to prove or disprove Love while assigning it a Þctional
status and valuation through word-magic.

I was surprised to learn that this duality of existence is the basic theme of the Bible scriptures, and
speciÞcally of the teachings of christ.

So, how important is it to learn the legal language of the kings (false gods)?

About as important as it is to learn to read and write, for the legal art requires not your ability to
read or write its words, only your consent that it and its deÞned terms is voluntarily your highest
law, whether you know and understand it or not. For legalism is the devil’s system of law of a
prison for debtors, the coded structure of a matrix of Þctional persons, places, and things, subsist-
ing only in a contractual dis-ease. The big legal lie. It exists and has power (artiÞcial life) only with
your own pretended belief (love) and acquiescence to its false existence and authority, like a cartoon
that somehow controls the Real world though it is in no way a part of Reality. It requires your be-
lief (love) in its false existence to exist falsely. If we never turn the television on, thus never giving
those Þctional characters and magistrates bound to its realm our power by respecting its false
images, currencies, and artful jurisdictions, then we may Live and breathe only as God intended in
the Purest of Love and Charity of Nature and in no other way and with no art necessary. All
jurisdiction is avoidable, which means all places (nouns/names) are avoidable.

!57
 —=—

“The latter part of a wise man's life is taken up in curing the follies,
prejudices, and false opinions he had contracted in the former.”
—Jonathan Swift, ‘Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral & Diverting’

—=—

Note again here that etymology and the language arts are two completely different subjects, one
being the origin (creation) of words and the other being a special and ofÞcial reconsideration and
ofÞciating (re-creation) of words under a certain jurisdiction, being utilized only in that artful,
Þctional realm and place (name of a Þctional city, state, district, nation, etc.). While etymology is
certainly relevant to the comprehension of the origin of common words, each art redeÞnes its own
terms for its own purpose and best interest and is in no way bound to any etymological or other
outside deÞnition of any of its own terms of art. In fact, its entire purpose is to pretend to be
separated from Reality. Thus an argument based in Reality falls on deaf ears in any of these artful
Þctions. One might consider this to be the difference between Real Life and the role-playing game
of ÒLife,Ó where that board game version requires players to assume a game-created ÒcharacterÓ or
ÒpersonaÓ that absolutely must follow the artful rules of the Þctional game and be bound in surety
by their speciÞed meanings. The game piece is similar to a person, a strawman in the legal realm.
The legal life of a public person-hood is no different from that game of artiÞcial Life, as we will
certainly come to Þnd out. And when it comes to the legal art, all jurisdictions are games of
Monopoly. A person is just an avatar, a game piece in someone else's game of Monopoly. That
person exists only in the game, and then only if the rules of the game (laws of Þction) are respected
and followed over the Law of Nature. In the law of nations though, it is always the creators of
money, the mint, treasury, and central bank that reigns supreme, for the whole legal game and all
its laws revolve around a national currency and the valuation of all things in it, in mammon.

Despite our induced ignorance, we are all participating in the legal art and jurisdiction of govern-
ment without comprehending the effect of its unique terms of art; that always prevalent legal
language. We fail to recognize its structure in political discourse simply because everything we say
is literally opposite of what we intend to say, standing unwittingly opposed to our very own will
and intention, often without comprehension it is even happening. For the legal realm of govern-
ment is an art form with its own ÒhigherÓ version of the Latinized English language. A contractual
relationship sets up its own scope of terms and conÞrms agreement to the laws of which those
speciÞc, artful word-terms make up. Our motives are unwittingly diverted against our own best
interests through this treachery of word magic, for every artful word is but a legal trap. Our strange
illiteracy stems only from reading, writing, and speaking the general English language, no matter
how skillful we may be in its use. The act of use does not require comprehension, only consent
garnered by the action of using some person, place or thing (name/noun) not oneÕs own. Fools
with PHD’s shall be welcomed with open arms, but only with the invisible chains of their persons
and ßattering legal titles in surety. For government protects the masters of fools, never acting in the
foolÕs favor. It respects and protects only persons, not men.

It is the intent of this work, therefore, to expose the reader to this supposed ÒhigherÓ language. It is
higher only because we never look up. It is higher because we stand under (under-stand) it without
actually comprehending it as it stands in tyranny over us. We accept the artiÞcial lower class and
status (false persona) it deÞnes us as with its own unique ÒhigherÓ words and terms of art, even as
we vote to support (choose to suffer) its control over us without comprehending our own
ignorance of it. We even believe that voting makes us somehow naturally free, even though we
must be voluntarily enslaved as subjects to that very government to be bestowed with this right in a
corporate, taxable franchise of voting for our own corrupt, commercial rulers. We vote for our own
slave-masters, as legal, public persons, as strawmen; as the property of that which we vote for. Of
course, common sense tells us that a subject has no actual (Natural) right to elect his master, any
more than God’s Creation (Creatures) gets to vote whether it manifests as a man or as a cockroach,

!58
both of which are Equal in God's Realm. But the illusion that a man is the president of us as
“people” instead of a corporation created by congress called the district of the United States being
the president (principal) of our persons in agency is certainly prevalent among the mass of goyim.
However, voting makes slaves feel better about their slavery, and so the customary charade
continues and a new super hero puppet is appointed every four years. But nothing of the structure
of the legal Þction ever actually changes. There are no good presidents or bad presidents, for
ÒpresidentÓ is merely the name of a Þctional, ßattering title that has no such qualities as good or
evil, and no man ever actually becomes a ÒpresidentÓ in Reality. President is a dead Þction of law,
and a Living man cannot become Þction any more than he may become a cockroach. But they sure
do play the part well…

In order to examine and contemplate fully such a hidden and powerful realm of word-magic as has
been retained within this work, we must temporarily suspend our own belief systems. We must
stop loving (believing in) what is not Real so as to examine that Þction with the Truth of our own
Reality and place within It. Only in this way was the author able to learn, kicking himself all the
way each time I overcame my nincompoop mentality, my insistence that Þction is Reality. We
cannot contemplate the opposing shadow of darkness behind every word-spell and legal concept
unless we temporarily extinguish the artiÞcial (artful) dark light (lucifer) of lies that covers it.
Hope, Love, and other emotions just get in the way of comprehension, for they are never actually
allowed as legal considerations, and so such feelings can only serve to confuse. Discovering the
Truth about the legal system we are trapped within, in other words, is like seeing a hotel room for
the Þrst time under a black light, where what is hidden shines only under that darkest of
illumination. For while we may believe we Exist in the light, we are controlled by what is hidden
from the True Light of God's Word (Law).

The reader is advised to take the following words to heart:

—=—

“Empty your mind…


Be formless; shapeless; like water…

Water can ßow or it can crash;

Running water never goes stale,

so youÕve gotta just keep on ßowingÉ

Do not believe in styles [names and titles],

styles separate man.

ItÕs a process of continuous ßow.

Be water my friend.”
—Bruce Lee

—=—

Finally, I must here state that somewhere along the strange and spiritual adventure of creating this
work, I realized that even my own intent had unwittingly been altered. While at Þrst it was
designed as an attempt to diagnose and save the patient that is our current society from itself, I
now am composing it only for those who somehow are able to survive independently and in
separation from what society will do to itself and its members in its unnatural and unchangeable
course of corruption, so that the same thing doesn’t happen again in yet another false revolution —
the circular history of repeated motions and acts of empire and nation-building. Round and round
we go, empire after empire designed speciÞcally to fail so that the aristocratic Order of the Phoenix
may again rise from its own re-created ashes of Roman rule, all the time being driven by the same
international bloodlines of timeless, false-immortal corporate criminals. Do we allow ourselves to

!59
revolve back to where we started only to allow our children in their heirless, stolen posterity to re-
live the past in the same forms of feudal debt slavery as us, or do we strive to force ourselves to
devolve back into something that works outside of this looping cycle of the manufacturers of the
Ages and of the systems of mammon, in a Life free from any and all artiÞce? Sadly, we cannot free
our children from legal bondage without Þrst freeing ourselves, as we will discuss.

Society cannot be saved, for society is only a temporary creation of man in the legal art, and all
creations of man are ultimately only temporary. Society is a political (artiÞcial) body. Society is the
public. Society is Þction. Society is not in any way spiritual; it is unreal, not of Nature, standing not
as a Creation of God. It is only a recreation and opinion of manÕs imagination. It is not self-evident
or self-existent. It must be forced and enforced by sanction of the men playing gods and
administrators over it.

In the end, only each of us individually can intentionally bring ourselves out of this dilemma,
becoming shining, Living examples and standing in spiritual Pureness to those around us. And we
must then Þnd, Love, and Live in each other so as to express our like-mindedness and protect
ourselves from those men who claim god-like powers to rule in tyranny over our foolish belief in
the legitimacy of their legal, Þctional methodologies and false systems of law espoused by corrupt
institutions made up of their own patented, proprietary words.

Can you imagine living without money?

Can you imagine acting and Being Purely in Love, Devotion, Forgiveness, and Charity to all men…
even toward your enemies?

This is our only future.


!60
 —=—

A Short Guide For 

Best Utilizing This Work
—=—

—=—

“Receive my instruction, and not silver; 


and knowledge rather than choice gold.
For wisdom is better than rubies;

and all the things that may be desired

ARE NOT TO BE COMPARED TO IT.”
—Proverbs 8: 10-11, KJB


—=—

Bearing in mind that this work is a learning tool for an entirely different language structure, one
that deceivingly sounds and looks exactly the same as the one we already speak, the reader should
prepare to abandon long-held beliefs and customary, habitual addictions to many fallacies and
falsehoods. Be they from patriotic, statist, religious, or other adversarial sources to Nature’s God,
the enclosed information will be offensive only to those who hold themselves as a personal part (in
person) of the artiÞcial systems they believe in. Fictions and the lies they are built on often hold
more power than Reality in the minds of men. For example, a man who believes he is part of any
corporation merely because he is a member, in contractual citizenship, or an employee of that
corporation, may identify so much with that artiÞcial structure that he indeed defends its name
with his very own Life and reputation. And so a man would die to protect something lifeless,
artiÞcial, and unspiritual (unnatural) in every way, something that actually does not Exist. And that
is the point of this work, for we habitually defend and prop up all that is artiÞcial over all that is
Reality. We are all controlled through our emotional attachments to purely unemotional and dead
things, many made up entirely of words on paper. And this is why we are powerless to the
necromancers who sell death over Life, ßesh over Spirit, and image over Source.

While it would be impossible to read this work in its entirety without having some emotional
response, I would simply ask the reader to consider that a reasonable discourse about a Þctional
corporation (church, religion, business, or government) should not be governed by emotion.
Emotion kills rationality and prevents reason. The foundation of these corporate entities is only as
words on paper, and not one of these artiÞcial persons (corporations, associations, municipalities,
etc.) may exist without speciÞc control of the minds and hearts of those who support them, so as to

!61
believe that those legal words are in fact a Reality of Life (of Nature). If the government is by and
for a People, and if the church is only a body and temple of People built by men, then both of these
are only as good as (or as corrupted as) the People who believe in and support them. And their
crimes are only as passable as those corrupted People allow them to be for their own beneÞt.

Please note also that some legal words and other concepts will be utilized and discussed at times
before they are fully deÞned, for instance, while being used in the deÞnition of other earlier
presented words and concepts. This, unfortunately, cannot be avoided, and it would be impossible
for this phenomenon not to take place. If the reader has doubts about any of the concepts put forth
initially herein, or has an emotional response based on prior or lifelong-held beliefs (loves) which
prevent the reader from continuing, please know that all writings within this work are purposeful,
and all that is unexplained will eventually be fully expounded upon at some later point in this
work. The entirety of purpose here is to differentiate between what is Real and what is not Real, the
revelation of just what is this legal matrix that has us under its control. Emotional response and
defense over anything not of Nature is ridiculous at best, dangerous at its worst. Destruction of Life
to further commercial and scientiÞc Þction protected by militarized governments is purely a satanic
(adversarial) pattern of thought processes. And every commercial on television and in print
supporting the so-called “defensive” actions of the offensive United States military as it unlawfully
occupies space in over 190 countries is based upon this corrupt pattern of thought.

What is written within is only designed to explain and establish what is Reality and what is not.
Belief and Reality often collide, and I can only hope that the search for actual, self-evident Truth as
it expresses Itself in Reality and not as mere perception of Reality to satisfy self-interest or cognitive
dissonance will prevail over the mind of the reader, allowing further study to alleviate subversive
confusion and doubt.

—=—

“Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?”
—Galatians 4:16, KJB

—=—

The more one is vested in these artiÞcial systems the more one will be offended by the plain,
Natural, self-evident Truth of the Reality of that Þction. A doctor will be offended more so by
criticism of the medical profession than his patient (victim). In his artiÞcial, ßattering title he may
either ignore such criticism by retaining a state of cognitive dissonance, or embrace and verify such
claim’s and their veracity. Only then may the man make a choice either to continue as part of the
problem in person and false title or to discontinue his actions with moral compunction and Law. But
ultimately, that ßattering title is used to legally commit unlawful though legally protected and
licensed, malpractice-insured, iatrogenic crimes against man and Nature, which ofÞcial statistics
state are responsible for over half of all deaths in America. Yes, doctors (agents) and the principal
corporations they represent in licensure of title and as prostitutes of the pharmaceutical
conglomerates that wine and dine them kill over half of all of those counted by such statistics, for
their signature is required to pre-scribe the potions and poisons that kill so many trusting souls. We
trust the insured title, forgiving the man. And we pay the greatest price for that respect of Þction
dressed in a white lab-coat.

An attorney may be offended that his job-title was historically and is of course today still ofÞcially
referred to as deviling, as being a devil, or that of a devil’s advocate or a devilmaster, but only because
he chooses to ignore the obvious Reality of his own profession and continues acting as that
ßattering title in cognitive dissonance, adding only vice (legal ad-vice) to all men in persona he
pretends to help for proÞt.

!62
All who profess these Þctions of law in employment and ßattering legal title may hate the Truth,
for Truth (God) comprehends no such Þction and no such title, putting all responsibility upon the
soul of the naked man.

That being said, this work is an equal opportunity offender, written by one who has just as many
reasons to be offended by his own writings due to his own ÒsinÓ in his own lifelong respect of
artiÞcial things. This work does not defend anyone or anything, least of all the author himself. I
point this Þnger equally at myself. It is not an apologetic compilation or justiÞcation for my own
actions. It takes the side of no government, system, man, Þction, or religion. Its purpose is only
enlightenment as to the Reality of those Þctional constructs and of their true intent of structure and
purpose, as deÞned in their own occulted words. Though this work certainly may be said to be a
compendium in defense of man and all Life under Jehovah, it cannot be said to be in support of
any artiÞcial construct, corporation, doctrine, law, religion, government, idea, concept, or any other
falsity used in that legal matrix and system of control over all men in order to keep them away
from their own Source of Nature. For the reader to take personal offense at anything written within
about things that are in fact quite impersonal and built in pure fakery Ñ while this would not at all
be an unexpected event Ñ I do ask the reader to remember that you are in these dismaying times
only defending an inanimate object or system, a building, a cult or club, words on paper, a Þctional
name or title, or some other dead, substance-less form. You are defending a purely Þctional thing.
Defense of names, titles, and organizations, as if these things are part of Reality, is purely a fools
errand. That which is dead and thus unable to speak for itself should not be defended by any man,
for that thing must be artiÞcial, legal, and those words cannot be anything but a lie. We must not
assign the qualities of the substance of the Living upon the dead. Only Reality; only the Living
should be defended when defenseless, and that includes every aspect and substance of Life in
Nature. Only then can the dead no longer control the living. This will be made more
comprehendible as we move on, for all things legal are in fact dead.

To this end, the author would ask of the reader a favor before going any further. This may perhaps
be more difÞcult of a task than anyone has ever asked of you before, though it requires no physical
exertion at all. My favor, asked only for the beneÞt of the reader, is to right now attempt to shed
your name, titles, numbers, and any other marks and images of what you believe you are in society
from your mind, if only temporarily. I am only asking you to read this work with at least a
pretended innocence from such artiÞcial concepts, as a child would view anything new without
preconception and with a truly uninhibited inquisition into its meaning, purpose, and intent, so
that the engrained false doctrines and concepts that rule and guide your civil life (in spiritual
death) do not interfere with your ability to realize what Real Life and Nature actually Is. The
greatest illusion is to simulate, to seamlessly blend what is Real with what is not in syn (sin), in
synthesis, by syncopation, causing syndrome and synthetics. Let us pre-tend here that by the end
of this work we must each make our initial choice to become a citizen-ship, a member of Þction
(antichrist, anti-God), or of any other Þction, government, religion, etc., or to follow the spiritual
path under the Law of Nature. Whatever you think and have strong opinions about right now will
make or break your ability to learn that the language you use in those currently chaotic thoughts
and opinions is designed to keep you ignorant and illiterate to the designs of those who have
imprisoned you within your own head. So before we go on, clear your mind. Hold no artiÞcial
certainties. Release your indoctrinations. Seek what is within this work what is self-evident and
nothing else. Be childlike in your observations. Set aside your ego, or simply go get a different book
designed to sooth it.

There are two realms, one of the substance of Reality (Nature) and one of Þction (legalism) built for
artiÞcial life forms. While words have very little or no meaning in Reality and in Nature, that is to
say that they do not actually effect anything already Existing by their utterance, the conÞrmed and
ratiÞed (loved/believed in) words or terms of art in the legal realm are what causes that Þction to
exist and subsist, and they empower man to become his own worst enemy and Þght against his
very own Nature. Fiction (art) is built only upon these words of art. And so the author wishes to
express here the fact that every word within this work, as expressed in legal form, has a very
special meaning. Take no word or concept for granted, for ignorance of one thing will lead to a lack

!63
of comprehension of another in an endless and quite intentional chain reaction. All excuses are
built upon Þctional barriers, and no excuse Exists in Nature. For if one is barred by the Laws of
Nature, no excuse thereof is necessary. No man can be expected to do that which is impossible, a
maxim of law that Exists in both the Natural and legal realms. The legal realm can only exist
through these artful terms expressed by actors (legal persons), just as a painting (art) can only exist
by the artistÕs expression and use of paint. The painting, like the legal thing, will exist exactly as its
creator and user applies his paint. Likewise, legal ideas and legal things (nouns/names) only exist
as expressions of the user and speaker of those words. One who is not artistically inclined will
likely create a mess. One who is ignorant of the terms of art used in the legal realm will similarly
create a mess for themselves, a circular trap of artiÞcial wisdom. Only by learning the art can the
artist and actor avoid mishaps and mistakes. For one cannot recognize a practitioner of word-magic
unless one may recognize the spelling and false authority of those words. One simply cannot defeat
evil without Þrst speaking its language and empathizing with its designs.

But donÕt worry, many prisoners of the legal realm become painters while they patiently languish
in their voluntarily ignorance within government prisons. For it takes not a crime to go to prison,
and no victim is needed, only a broken civil and social contract in a presumption of citizenship.

Several dictionaries are quoted in this work, the abbreviated source of each printed next to each
copied deÞnition. While it may seem a bit strange to some readers to be reading the deÞnitions of
words between rantings by myself expounding upon how these words, when placed together,
control and manipulate our actions, I have found the key to an incredible mystery that IÕd like to
share here, which might make this work more reasonable in its construction. You see, I have found
that each dictionary, no matter what type, art, or language, is a story to be told. But there is a
problem. The words are written in alphabetical order. And so imagine reading the works of the
greatest authors in history, from Twain to Dickinson to King, but doing so where the words are
printed not as a story form, but in alphabetical order, each word having only a strict deÞnition of its
speciÞc meaning(s) in that particular story. Imagine every person, place, and thing, and all the
descriptions (adjectives) and actions (verbs) thereof, all printed out of order and yet in a quite
unreadable order. To the average reader, this would be a fruitless adventure, and the book would
likely sit on the shelf collecting dust for years before ending up in some garage sale or thrift store. It
is not a lack of desire or want in the reader, for these stories of Þction and non-Þction alike are said
to be the greatest genre writings of all time. But they are simply unreadable in any enjoyable
fashion that tells a story, simply because their words have been rearranged in a way that happens
in no other place or way. It is a completely unnatural way of looking at a story, requiring the mental
placing of each of those words together like a jigsaw puzzle of the mind. And so whatever the
intent of the author of those meticulously placed words was originally in story-form certainly
would be lost, hidden by their painstaking order from A to Z. This also applies to the legal
dictionaries, for they tell an incredible and dark tale, and we are all stuck living our lives under
their Þction. In other words, only the author knows the story of those words. The reader sees only a
ciphered code. This is how we are controlled by the gods (creators/authors) and administrators
(judges) of words. We are characters in someone else's story without a script. And the purpose of
this work is to help the reader to put these ciphered legal words into a story, a sort of antithesis to
the Biblical christ story, so that we may know the part we play. For the actions and laws of the legal
person are always opposed to the actions and Law of God's Word (Son).

Most people, and with perfectly good reasoning, are not going to pick up a dictionary and just start
reading from A to Z. Even fewer of those people will read one word and skip around the dictionary
to be able to comprehend all of the other related words relating in deÞnition to that Þrst word, as
when we are instructed at the ends of deÞnitions to ÒseeÓ certain other terms elsewhere. But how
else, mind you, can we possibly learn the art form and story that each dictionary is describing?
How may we learn and then communicate medicine or engineering without Þrst understanding
each term and then using them not in their alpha-numerical listing, but in a complete and binding
sentence that tells the story of our current dilemma of pain or pleasure? How can we tell the story
of the strawman (legal person) without Þrst deciphering those legal words that created it?

!64
But the questions that this author puts forward to each reader is this: how can we follow the law if
we can only see it in empty form? How can we possibly know and understand the law if we do not
know the story that makes up its words? What use is a dictionary without a story to explain its
usage? What use is a code without anything to be decoded? Even more of a noodle-baker is to
contemplate how we have been made to follow this legal law when, despite their similarities, we
have little to no idea or comprehension of what any of its words actually mean? It’s a safe bet that
the answer to these questions is the same answer that will tell us why we’ve been so unreasonably
conditioned to hate the words and story of the Bible without knowing their True meaning. For he
who controls the appearance (publication) of words and their deÞnitions controls the man forced to
use them without proper meaning and under-standing. The property-master of words can cause
most of us to act against the many foundational Laws (doctrine) of the Bible even while we
ßatteringly claim ourselves to be ÒChristians.Ó This is the ultimate power of authority, the power
not only to deceive through word-magic, but to cause men to act in the most utter and arrogant
self-deceit.

There is a lesson to be learned here, for what we do not realize is that the legalistic law does not
require any such knowledge or comprehension of its terms of art to be binding upon its user, only
that we each volunteer to follow it through our actions. In other words, as the maxim of law states,
to know the law and to be bound by the law are considered as THE SAME THING by the agents
and agencies of law. I need not know the law to volunteer and contract to be under it, which is
why totally illiterate folks did and continue to sign their name with an X. The X signiÞes intention.
And some reports today claim that at least 50% of Americans are indeed illiterate. So if they cannot
read the law, how can they Truly under-stand the law? A man that cannot read or write is still
under the law, not because he knows the law, but because his is birthed under its artful creators
and he conÞrms its authority over him by use of its legal entity, its person (status), rights, and
beneÞts. Only a fool, which we all are, would agree to be bound by a law that cannot be
comprehended or known in the Nature of self-evidence. For you see, under-standing in the legal
realm means only to STAND UNDER some authority and law of the gods (legal creators). I need
not a critical mind to be confounded and governed by such corrupting law. And this is how we are
all controlled by the words of law, through our ignorance thereof combined with our blind
acceptance of that which we agree to under-stand but do not know, of that which is written in the
devil’s (attorney’s) forked tongue.

CONFOUNDED - participle passive - 1. MIXED OR BLENDED IN DISORDER; perplexed;

abashed; dismayed; PUT TO SHAME AND SILENCE; astonished. 2. Enormous; as a
confounded story. [Vulgar.] (Webs1828)

—=—

Silence is consent. Shame and especially shameful ignorance leads to silence. Misspoken words
might as well be silence. And so knowledge is more valuable than all the worldly wealth that can
be had, as the scriptures tell us repeatedly, for only with knowledge can one be free from the power
of the unknown. Ignorant speech is no better and is often worse than silence, as the using of the
legalized version of words that mean the opposite of what we intend to express by our common
parlances.

As we proceed with this story of each of our active false personas, our strawmen, as these usually
alphabetized words are instead displayed by this author in a story form that reveals their
correlation with each other as well as their alternative and often opposing or adversarial (satanic)
meaning to Reality in that Þgurative legal art and realm (jurisdiction), remember that these
dictionaries of law all tell a story, and that the story they tell is hidden in plain sight. But the stories
they tell, just like any tale of old to be told, are displayed in a way that cannot be read as a story.
This is purposeful. For the Bible too is a story of the Highest Law, told not in some dry and
impossible dictionary format but with personiÞed and anthropomorphized characters that act out
the law in parables and allegorical tales that relate to all men. Ironically, in this work, the author is
assigned with two opposing missions: Þrstly, to tell the story of the legal law from the words

!65
provided in legal dictionaries, and secondly, to use dictionaries, lexicons, and concordances to
show the true meanings of the words used in those parabolic scriptural stories. For to translate
them into modern english is the gravest mistake imaginable. To read a story without knowing the
meaning and origins of the words used to tell it is a futile effort, which is exactly what the power-
brokers and controllers of church and state wish to see in its general population of goyim. The
intent of any work can only be known by comprehension of the language and terms used at the
time of the actual writing. And so I am left with the duel task of deÞning (ciphering) the storied
words of the Bible and un-alphabetizing (deciphering) the un-storied words of the legal
dictionaries. Both of these tools are needed to tell a proper story, for to read any story its words
must be decipherable by having available their dictionary meanings and rules of use at hand.
Intent is everything. To hide intent by hiding the meaning of terms is the ultimate deceit and the
main tool of control of all corporate governments and licensed religious incorporations of the state.

—=—

"Education is useless without the Bible.”

—Noah Webster

—=—

The purpose of this work is to tell that story of the law of man (Þction), as confounding and twisted
and downright evil as it is, as compared to that Law of scripture (Reality), by deciphering the
alphabetical cipher and exposing each as it connects with all others. It is the intent of this author to
tell you the story of the law that has never been told outside of the coded Order of the creators of
this art of legalism. And so for the Þrst time in our lives, we need not continue to use ignorance of
either law as an excuse. And for the Þrst time, the individual will stand in the position that he or
she will be forced to make a choice, an election, based on knowledge. For to know the corruption of
manÕs law and still act (stand) under its legalistic authority is the penultimate sin. It is voluntary
ignorance of the worst kind.

The main dictionary sources used herein are the following dictionaries and Bible:

(Webs1828) - Noah Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1828. Considered as the
most revered American English Language dictionary ever created, from the "Father of
American Scholarship and Education” and taking 28 years to compile and complete. Noah,
being now long dead, cannot be blamed for the corrupted recreation of the modern
“Webster’s” dictionaries of today, despite his very namesake being used falsely by modern-
day corporations to legitimize them in the horriÞc syndicalism of governmentÕs educational
institutions.


(Bouv1856) - Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856, as commissioned and made law by congress, as
“Adapted to the constitution and laws of the United States of America and of the several States
of the American Union.Ó What else but this should be used to deÞne the intent of the legal
terms of art used in the US constitution?

(BouvMaxim) - BouvierÕs Law Dictionary (Maxims/principles of law section), 1856

(Bouv1874) - Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 14th Edition, 1874


(WCA1889) - William C. Anderson’s, A Dictionary of Law, 1889, as “A dictionary of law:

consisting of judicial deÞnitions and explanations of words, phrases, and maxims: and an
exposition of the principles of law: comprising a dictionary and compendium of American and
English jurisprudence.”


!66
 (Black1) - Black’s Law Dictionary, 1st edition, 1891


(Black2) - Black’s Law Dictionary, 2nd edition, 1910


(Black4) - Black’s Law Dictionary, Revised 4th edition, 1968. All of Black’s dictionaries are
considered as a legitimate though generally secondary source for legal terms and concepts in
the courts.

(KJB) - King James Bible, as the King’s (Crown’s) patented law, translated from the 1611, and
part of the unenforced common law of America. I do not call this as a Bible “version” because
it is “in fact” an original, patented work, a simulacra (copy without an original) formed of the
English (dog-Latin) language to hide the True intent of the ancient and Natural knowledge of
the many scriptures. We shall look into these English words according to their Hebrew, Greek,
Chaldean, and Latin origins and intents, not by their purposefully misleading transliterations
into English from a king (crown) that is titled as “god” and vicar of christ.

—=—

Please note that for ease of use and comprehension, the citations in each dictionary deÞnition with
reference to court cases and decisions, statutes, and other legal source descriptions, historical
references like dates and authors, and of the individual authors who created them have been
deleted from these ofÞcial deÞnitions. Readers may seek this information easily by sourcing these
dictionaries for themselves, and by this editing alone many dozens of confusing pages were able to
be cut from this work. About these edited-out sources and informations, the reader should not be
so concerned with the particular source, time, place, and jurisdiction by which these deÞnitions
were created, though this is of course very important. But paramount here for this work is the fact
that these are mostly court decisions and opinions, and so the reader should realize that any word
can be applied to suit any current legal need of the court (the state). In Þction, anything goes at any
time, and Þctional words are anchored to nothing in the Real.

If Bugs Bunny needs a hat, that hat is merely drawn in by the creator of the cartoon realm and its
Þctional law to suit its needs. So too is the law created and recreated at the whim of its creator gods
(magistrates). To be under a legal Þction means already that every word is a legal lie, and so one
should never expect the court to honor the Nature of Reality or Law, even its own false law, in any
way, shape, or form. For the court has no substance in Reality, existing only when and where its
own jurisdiction is established and agreed upon (consented to) by all involved through its own
proprietary legal persona. Word deÞnitions will be changed according to modern need, as will be
shown. It is this fact that we are concerned with; not foolish beliefs in the veracity of any singular
deÞnition, constitution, or system of law, but of the shocking fact that they would actually deÞne
these words in such an evil and unlawful (but legally permissible) way, and can and will do so at
any time to suit their commercial needs, their pocketbooks, and their proclaimed majesty (god-
ship). But the origin and foundation of these words seldom changes, based mostly in their Latin
and Greek contexts. Again, all of these purposefully deleted notes may be found quite intact within
their quoted sources, mostly that of the speciÞc court cases referred to. This was done purely for
ease of illustration, use and comprehension and for no other purpose. No deceit or obfuscation is
intended, and all digitalized dictionaries will be available on my website (StrawmanStory.info) as
long as it is up-kept for the readerÕs beneÞt.

Paragraphs with words described in a purely etymological word origin type, with the word
underlined but without being bolded, presented like this word etymology, are sourced from the
Online Etymology Dictionary by Douglas Harper (etymonline.com) unless otherwise notated.

All other sources and quotes from history, law, court cases, US Code, authors and poets, etc., will be
sourced in full and individually so. No footnotes will be used in this work due to its nature, and all
sources will appear in-stead with their quoted works.

!67
Chapters are used within, though this work could technically be read as one entire work just as any
dictionary might be read (from A-Z). As more of a customary functionality, chapters are thus
inserted herein.

Repetition of certain terms and concepts within is an intentional act by the author. The same thing
or idea can be stated in many different ways and with several different words, which often gives
the appearance that word deÞnitions are changed in court proceedings when indeed they are not.
The addition of word-terms alters the meaning or subject of the root word, and grammar plays an
ultra-important role in how we are treated (how our appearance or lack thereof is respected). For a
term of Nature can be so easily twisted into a term of art (Þction), and names (nouns) are made to
replace the Reality (verbs, adjectives) they are attached to. Again, as the reader will come to know,
every word in the legal art is attached to and dependent upon every other word to itself exist. It’s a
closed-loop matrix of false, coded existence. Each word carries the notion as deÞned Ñ as above, so
too deÞned below. Like any structure, all the pieces play a part in the whole, and each part
supports the other parts, and is of course often used in the very structural deÞnitions of those other
parts. And so if only one word is disrespected, a cascading effect must necessarily take place upon
those above and below it, for no ambiguity Exists in any word of art. In Þction, words make up the
entirety of the world. In Reality, no words Exist. The Nature of Reality never changes despite these
legal terms and names of art, any more than a painting changes the actual subject of that art in the
Reality of Nature. Art is only ever the perception of Reality, sometimes called as a personal
(believed in) “truth,” but never as the actual Truth of Reality in and of Itself. Thus lies can also be
called as legal “truths” or “facts.” This is the false nature of man’s creations and imaginations,
which are only ever temporary, and which are always opposed to the Reality of God’s Nature (the
permanence of Creation). 1,000 paintings or 10,000 words foisted upon Nature will never actually
change or effect Nature, though perception of their Þctional ÒtruthÓ over their re-presented Reality
in the minds and imaginations of men made to believe in the painting (Þction) and words over that
of the Reality (Nature) they re-present in artiÞce is certainly the cause of most of our collective
problems. Words and images effect man, and only then does man effect Nature, making man only a
puppet to his own beliefs. For even men can be painted as gods, their Þctional titles believed
(loved) by the billions who suffer that costume jewelry called a crown over the only real treasure
that is knowledge. For with knowledge of the king’s secrets and hidden-in-plain-sight language no
man can be king over men, and no knowledgeable man can be made a slave but by money and
pretended wealth and power given in exchange for his acceptance of and allegiance to the big lie.
It’s all fakery, “Kings” being no more Real than “Santa Claus.” And it all must be put to an end in
the individual minds and imaginations of men, the source from whence it was formed in the Þrst
place.

I especially like the way the Bible puts it, an unshakable parable for all men who would be rulers:

Ñ=Ñ

“And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man
desire to be Þrst, the same shall be last of all, AND SERVANT OF ALL.”
—Mark 9:35, KJB

Ñ=Ñ

Christ was of course here only to serve, not to rule. And so any who follow him must follow him as
a trusting servant to all men, not a king or other “god.” This continuous theme in the scriptures
always tells us that the most powerful among us should be he who serves and protects all others,
not by force or legal governance but by charity and piety alone. The strong must make strong the
weak, as the wealthy must make wealthy the poor, until there are none of these inequalities left to
even consider. This must be the foundation of Law; Its choice always conscious and self-evident.

!68
In this work, words that appear to be hyphenated when they should not be are also an intentional
editing by the author. The reader should, by the end of this work, know exactly why each word is
separated into its formal parts, and hence forth remain vigilant of each integral part of the whole.

All aspects of this work have purpose. Ignore nothing. Dismiss nothing. Only fools continue in any
action without a full comprehension of its source ßow and structure of law. This is the legal way.
This is the way of madness and patriotism. For nothing whole can be known by its individual
parts. To the dismay of insane scientists everywhere, the DNA of Life carries not with it the essence
and soul of Life, and one is not intended to be created without the other.

As for the disposition of the author, the following quotes perhaps best describe my own outlook
and perceptions, and may hopefully defeat any notion of mistaken expression of egotism that
might be perceived by the overtly discerning and opinionated reader stuck in his own legal
delusion. For I concur wholly with the idea that:

—=—

“All intelligent thoughts have already been thought; what is necessary

is only to try to think them again.”

“Ignorant men raise questions that wise men answered a thousand years
ago.”
—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (separate quotes)

—=—


While attempting to fathom the vast amounts of research and word-terms within this work, please
proceed with this one constant: the author is not trying to re-deÞne the language you speak to your
children, your spouse, or to the rest of the Real world. The author is merely presenting the reader
with factual evidence that the common language you currently speak is not the same as the
“king’s” legal language, and that this fact is harming yourself and your loved ones in the fullest of
degrees through the ignorance of misguided intention. In other words, and this point is key, you
may as well be completely illiterate with regard to reading, writing, and rhetoric when acting in
agency within the legal realm of jurisdiction, which for a commercial citizen-ship in artiÞcial
existence is implied at all times. The common, spoken language certainly sounds and is spelled
exactly the same as its legal counterpart. But those artful, legal words actually have very different
and special deÞnitions depending on status (person-hood). Their very purpose is only and has only
ever been to deceive the many, and speciÞcally to cause us to deceive ourselves. Fiction is never
Reality.

Let’s look at an example to get us into the mood…

What would your answer be if a “judge” were to ask you if you are a “man” in his courtroom
(jurisdiction)? What would your response in legal terms be? For legal terms are all that judge seeks.
The typical illiterate, public-minded citizen would simply answer yes, or even more foolishly claim
they are instead a subservient-in-status wo-man (womb-man) due to the ridiculousness of social
conditioning and status. But very few men would actually attempt to clarify what that word “man”
as a term of the legal artiÞce actually means coming from that devilmasterÕs mouth, which would
cause an enquiry into exactly how that word of art is speciÞcally and intentionally being used by
that judge in its own jurisdiction, whether generally or specially (by species), in public or in
private, as a noun or an adjective, or as a verb, a name, a ßattering title as a legal status, as a term of
Nature, or maybe as a term of the civil law?

!69
So are you, the reader, a man?

The answer, of course, is that it depends on who’s asking and in which jurisdiction? Ironically, no
judge will ever, ever ask this question. For Real men do not and cannot exist in the realm of Þction.

Let us be clear… What is the substance of man is self-evident. Reality simply is not up for debate.
But the word (art) that is spelled as man can also mean slave. It can mean male or female or both
considered together in plurality. It can mean employee, agent, user, friend, or enemy. It is a reference to
the collective corporation of law enforcement ofÞcers of the state, colloquially known as the man.
And of course it can also mean a Creation of God when used with only Pure intent. In Latin it is
homo, which in English slang can mean the species man, both male or female, or it can reference a
man scientiÞcally by subspecies class as homosappien or by sexual orientation as homosexual. It’s all
about perspective and context, you see… the con (trickery) of artful word-text. These governments
of man’s law expect most men to never contemplate such a question as this, as if the words used to
describe their status (public persona) by their gods (magistrates) could mean anything magical
(transformative), and so that we might never realize that we are clandestinely being called as slaves
when called by (rendered in) the ßattering Þctional title (noun) of man. For a legal “man” cannot be
a Real man, only a similitude but not a sameness, an image, a form without substance. They cause
even our own ego to make good that artiÞcial (evil) id-entity which is opposed to our very Nature
and True Self. Man, therefore, is a word very much like the word god. Perhaps most important
about this dualism is to understand that all men are either a slave (man) of God or a slave (person)
of false gods of men. Unless we specify our Self as a man of (Created by) God, and unless we
further say man of the God of Nature and Existence (Creation), we may very well end up calling
some artiÞcial person, place, or thing as our god without even realizing itÉ

Oops, too late!

—=—

“Woe unto them THAT CALL EVIL GOOD, AND GOOD EVIL; THAT
PUT DARKNESS FOR LIGHT, AND LIGHT FOR DARKNESS; that put
bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitterÉ Therefore as the Þre devoureth
the stubble, and the ßame consumeth the chaff, so THEIR ROOT
SHALL BE AS ROTTENNESS, and their blossom shall go up as dust:
BECAUSE THEY HAVE CAST AWAY THE LAW OF THE LORD OF
HOSTS, AND DESPISED THE WORD of the Holy One of Israel.”
—Isaiah 5: 20, 24, KJB

—=—

“The fear of the LORD is THE BEGINNING OF KNOWLEDGE: BUT

FOOLS DESPISE WISDOM AND INSTRUCTION.”
—Proverbs 1:7, KJB

—=—

ÒHear the word of the LORD, ye children of Israel: FOR THE LORD
HATH A CONTROVERSY WITH THE INHABITANTS OF THE LAND,

!70
BECAUSE THERE IS NO TRUTH, NOR MERCY, NOR KNOWLEDGE
OF GOD IN THE LAND.”
—Hosea 4:1, KJB

—=—

“CASTING DOWN IMAGINATIONS, AND EVERY HIGH THING

THAT EXALTETH ITSELF AGAINST THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD, and
bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ…”
—2 Corinthians 10:5, KJB

—=—

“Whereby, when ye read, YE MAY UNDERSTAND MY KNOWLEDGE IN

THE MYSTERY OF CHRIST.”
—Ephesians 3:4, KJB

—=—

“Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causeth to err from the words
of knowledge.”
—Proverbs 19:27, KJB

—=—

“For wisdom is a defence, and money is a defence: but the excellency of

knowledge is, that WISDOM GIVETH LIFE TO THEM THAT HAVE IT.”
—Ecclesiastes 7:12, KJB (*Note: ‘defence’ is British spelling of ‘defense.’)

—=—

“Therefore MY PEOPLE ARE GONE INTO CAPTIVITY, BECAUSE THEY

HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE: and their honourable men are famished, and
their multitude dried up with thirst.”
—Isaiah 5:13, KJB

—=—

“AND WISDOM AND KNOWLEDGE SHALL BE THE STABILITY OF

THY TIMES, and strength of salvation: the fear of the LORD is his
treasure.”
—Isaiah 33:6, KJB

—=—

!71
 —=—

“That frustrateth the tokens of the liars, and maketh diviners mad;
THAT TURNETH WISE MEN BACKWARD, AND MAKETH THEIR
KNOWLEDGE FOOLISH…”
—Isaiah 44:25, KJB

—=—

Spiritual knowledge of the Truth is this: legally speaking, evil is good and good is evil, freedom is
slavery, and liberty is only the invisible and open slavery of the legal franchise of political freedom.
The dungeon master makes the rules of the prison, whatever its form and appearance, and every
nation is only a legally (Þctionally) bordered, open-air prison for persons (debtors) of the nation.
Nations are but a virtual dungeon underneath the usurious central treasury called a debtor’s hell. A
good slave is allowed a legal, civil, commercial existence within bordered estates and municipal
corporations (cities and counties), and that freedom is called a corporate franchise of public (national)
citizen-ship. If you donÕt believe these few statements, then we have a lot of soul-searching and
language instruction to catch up on. Fasten your seatbelt, because this will be like jolting your Self
out of a coded nightmare as we pull ourselves out of this legal word matrix together.

That said, remember that the legal language is always a Þction, always a lie, no exceptions. Its
words are always artiÞcial. And it is language alone that causes man to act outside of his own
Nature, to root his Self in Þction. These legalized words describe nothing in Reality, only the false
form and show of any actual substance. And so terms of art always oppose Nature and Its Law.
Real estate is just a bunch of paper. A corporation is just many pieces of paper. A public person is
just a deeded bank note certiÞed, named, and numbered so as to be used by men in surety and in
the agency of a commercial vessel, and so that its masters above it may legally (by make-believe)
ignore Reality and shirk their negative (Natural) duties to all men under the Natural Law. They just
need our voluntary consent, which we give through our actions in persona, from the signature to
the use of the surname and insurance number. In other words, legality was created to allow men to
harm other men with the protection, insurance, and authority of manÕs recreated Þctions of law. We
seek license to do harm to one another in any way possible, be it by ÒlawfulÓ usury (interest) and
gain or by legalized gangs called police and military ofÞcers that commit murder by license.
Ultimately, everything in the legal realm can only ever be nothing but words, falsely re-presenting
and generally acting as a work-around to something or Higher Law in Reality (Nature).

Lastly, please always remember one thing. Any anger or frustration you might feel while reading
the combined words within this work is only caused by a difference not of opinion, but of word-
dissection. Words are vastly interpretive, and chances are that my words as written will be
mistakenly misinterpreted by the reader at some point. If emotional outrage or adversarial
thoughts well up as you read this work, remember that your response is merely to lifeless symbols
on paper (or a computer screen). Stop. Consider. Ask questions. Consider my intent. Take notes.
Move on. And likely your concern or question will be addressed as we continue. Often we defend
things that donÕt Exist in Reality and are upset when we imagine them to be something offensive in
our minds, such as our ßattering titles, our ethnicities, our countries, and even our names. Wars are
literally only ever started to defend Þctional, artiÞcial things, and this is a horriÞc realization. Life is
extinguished to protect anti-life, to defend that which only exists as Þctional words on paper as
information, as fruit (facts) of the tree of worthless, useless knowledge. Within these many pages,
the reader would be hard-pressed not to Þnd the answer to any questions or concerns that might
pop up. Nothing in this book is designed to harm or anger the reader. It is only the Truth as it
corresponds more or less to Reality that ever hurts our own egotistical imaginations and empty
representations of ourselves and of our world view. What we project as our pretended self-image to
others while acting in persona and ßattering, legal title is never the Truth, only a conÞrmed and
ratiÞed lie accepted as normal and ofÞcial on the face of it (prima facie) in the legal matrix. And it is

!72
only the Truth of Reality and exposition of how Þction is imagined to be Reality that is presented
herein, limited only by the limitations of the author's competency in articulation. When you reach
the end of this work, you will Þnd that there is nothing to buy, there are no leading statements to
provoke you to join any group, religion, club, or government. There is absolutely no ulterior motive
to this work. Please read it with the same regard as that purity of intention for which it was written
in. Words cannot harm you unless you let them, and my words cannot harm you unless you love
the artiÞce of Þction more than the Reality of Nature.

What I offer within this work is only the scriptural, spiritual wisdom that I have learned, which in
the most simple of verses is revealed:

—=—

“…but though OUR OUTWARD MAN perish, 


yet THE INWARD MAN is renewed day by day.”
—2 Corinthians 4:16, KJB

—=—

Sadly, as Huxley so eloquently stated, slaves often “learn to love their servitude” despite their own
best interests; and servitude only exists as that big legal lie that mentally enslaves us all. It is of
course only through language arts that this enslavement is possible, the causality of the
externalization of God instead of a Oneness of internalized Being. For even the soldiers who use
force are controlled only by their beliefs (love) in the legitimacy of the Þctional crown and ofÞciated
words of their masters law. Thus, the perfect soldier is of course the most illiterate and unthinking
of all men.

The outward man is the strawman, the artiÞcial representation, reputation, and personiÞcation of
one's True Self into an extrinsic, separate id-entity completely detached from Reality. It is non-
innocence.

The goal of this work is to allow those who want to know, those who wish to see and hear, to
conduct themselves no longer in a defenseless position due to the ignorance of the legal meanings
of these entrapping words, but to act instead always in an innocent, Pure state of Being. For if man
cannot perceive the legal Þction falsely attached to everything around him, he is destined to Live
his own Life stuck behind a Þctional character as well, enslaved to the artiÞce of manÕs
imagination. If he cannot see the words that make up the program of the legal matrix, then he will
always remain plugged in to its artiÞcial, virtual, coded false reality and law. And when the
Þctional name is summoned like a demon by these devil-masters of the legal realm, so too will the
man be tricked and compelled into appearing as that Þctional demon within its courts like a
puppet on strings.

If you think you know what a demon and a devil is, then you really need to learn the legal
deÞnitions for these words before the next time your strawman gets summoned to legally appear
before them in their own designed courts of this legal debtorÕs hell.

And so we beginÉ 


!73
 —=—

Chapter 1:

Red Pill Sunday School

—=—

—=—

“But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed.”
—John 7:49, KJB

—=—

To preface this chapter before delving into this complex topic, I feel the need to warn the reader…

I have come to the realization that there is, metaphorically if you will, a sort of mysterious spell or
curse upon the Bible. It seems to effect everyone that touches it. This curse manifests in each man
differently, in a multitude of differing opinions and dissonances, as the Bible seems to magically
conÞrm or magnify exactly what the reader of it seeks to hear or believe. If one reads the Bible with
the intent to disprove it as actual history, for instance, this defeatist attitude will be strengthened as
the Bible stories fulÞll that intent. The opposite, however is also True, for history requires only
belief, not Truth. Thus history is destroyed by non-belief while it is exalted by those it satiates.

If one reads the Bible instead like a bag of fortune cookies, seeking small snippets of wisdom in a
completely unconnected story, then certainly this is what the Bible will provide, and for that one
man this found treasure, limited and disconnected as it may be, will become in his mind the whole
story of the Bible. But the self-evident Law of Nature is clear, that the whole may never be known
by just a few or even most of its parts. If one is searching for what God is according to one’s already
pre-conceived notions and after years of inßuence by others, then chances are one may come away
in the same imaginary state he or she arrived in, yet all the more conÞdent in that image of idolatry
without substance. And if one came to the Bible to Þnd a justiÞcation for charging usury upon his
fellow man or family member, then he may ignore the New Testament Law altogether and utilize
only the Old Law and Testament for his own self-aggrandizement, and he may thus justify his sin.
Even the more modern translations seem to be but fallacious self-gratitudes on the part of the
translators, including of course the King’s (god’s) English (dog-Latin) translation of 1611.

In my particular case, and in my search for the Pure and untainted Truth of all things, all roads
while researching the legal law over many years seemed inextricably to lead straight back to the
Bible, where I would without a hitch Þnd the opposing Law. And so, because any work is only as
good as the author's intent and desire to discover the Truth about his subject, I approached the

!74
Bible with my own best possible attempt at total neutrality. In other words, I learned only what the
Bible was teaching by examining the intentions and meanings of its original word-text, instead of
seeking what I wanted to hear to justify my own agenda or want. And I certainly did not keep with
me what I had already been told about the Bible by so many different lovers, haters, priests, popes,
charlatans, evangelists, satanists, skeptics and luke-warmers. And so what I found in my own
purposeful neutrality was not merely wisdom, but instead what is and will remain for the rest of
my Life the very fountainhead of all True knowledge. For the Bible is not a book that one masters,
but a book that allows mastery of one’s True Self. It is more powerful in True Self-defense than any
martial art, and more full of wisdom than any library or sage. For it is indeed the Book of Nature’s
Law. It is a get-out-of-the-matrix-free card.

But the curse remains… for what I found can only be seen by he who is untainted, whose quest is
Pure. The Bible is not a religion, for only men may created
create and
andpartake
partakeininreligion.
religion.The
Thereligions
religions
that exist today use the Bible as their justiÞcation, their furniture, and yet the Bible remains as it
were untainted by their false doctrines and sermons. For the Law of Nature cannot actually be
altered by manÕs imaginations or manipulations. Man may create even genetic modiÞcations and
chimeras in his arrogance, yet his efforts will always be confounded as those false creations will
still be bound to and suffer Nature’s Law. For the Law Itself will never be altered by man’s
creations. That which is temporary (of man) will eventually be consumed by the Forces of Nature.
Some call this self-evident Truth as the wrath of God. Some call it fate or destiny. And yet even these
technocratic madmen may seek Biblical reference to such chimeric beasts where, instead of learning
the lesson taught for such tinkering with the harmony and Design of True Creation, the foolish
dream and license of how to Create like a God regardless of consequence and harm is all they seek.

—=—

“Ask, and it shall be given you; SEEK, AND YE SHALL FIND; knock,
and it shall be opened unto you…”
—Matthew 7:7, KJB

—=—

There is but one obstacle to knowledge, and that is one’s enemy. To know thy enemy, one must
know thyself.

If one seeks to improve one’s love or hate for some exterior, corporate religion in the Bible, one will
Þnd it. If one seeks the power to become a tyrant, one may Þnd that as well. If one seeks peace, it is
there. And yet, if he seeks the art of war, it is also there. The Bible tells the story of all, of good and
evil, of light and dark, and of moral rectitude and its depravity all at the same time. For to have
knowledge of the Truth of all things, the burden of what is the anti-knowledge of all things must
also be told, or the Law will stand without perspective and purpose. How can one Þght evil if one
cannot recognize it in all its forms?

Finally, we come to the two points of Light (knowledge and understanding) that are furthest apart
within these two extremes. Firstly, we have he who has never read the Bible, and yet very often
may stand as its loudest antagonist. Like the victim of a movie critic, the fool that never seeks
certainly shall never Þnd. But chances are he will be the most outspoken fool of the bunch.

And then there is he that seeks the untainted Truth in all things no matter how it may harm his
own world view, one willing to sacriÞce even the false self-image he pretends to the Truth no
matter how painful. This is the rare marauder whom, after picking the lock of the trickiest of
keyholes by surpassing every pin and tumbler that stand as the most intricate of stumbling blocks
to knowledge, like a thief in the night suddenly Þnds he has free range to discover what before was
self-evident but not in conscious awareness. Like Dorothy in Oz, suddenly the haze is lifted and the

!75
color of the Nature of Truth can begin to be seen. And someday that satisfying click of one’s own
mental lock being broken rings True, and the self-evidence of that collective knowledge within is
seen and acknowledged to be what It Truly is for the Þrst time. This happens when no sides or
opinions are left, for Truth has no sides and needs no opinions to Exist as what Is self-evident (self-
Existence). And this Truth is how God is deÞned in the Bible, not as any man or other entity
anthropomorphized idol, but as all that Is in self-Existence (Truth). Belief suddenly seems like a
silly concept at this point, for how can one not believe in Existence, in what is self-evident Truth?
And yet this is where our minds have been misled, to doubt the Existence of True Existence Itself,
and thus disregard Its self-evident Law of Nature!

This has been the greatest magic trick ever cast, effecting billions of people worldwide. But now it
is time to unveil this illusion and correct the great delusion it has caused. It is about here where
your heart pounds as you realize that this kind of knowledge can never be lost or forgotten, that
Reality can never be taken from your perspective again, for what the Bible reveals is the choice to
under-stand and meld into all of Existence as the Oneness of God, to fulÞll the very purpose of
your Source of Existence.

And Þnally, when all of oneÕs previous beliefs have been crushed by the Pure and unadulterated
Truth, as the ego deteriorates and lays dead along side its beloved and protected false id-entity, and
as therefore all cognitive dissonance and disharmony disappears from oneÕs sensesÉ

It is at this point you feel more alone than you ever have felt in your Life.

It is at this point when you seek to fulÞll the very purpose of the Bible Law, which is to seek those
who seek what you did and become One again with GodÕs Nature together; to Þnd those who've
pulled themselves out of that legal matrix and govern-ment (mind control) simulation, or to help
those that have already started and those whom might be willing to try. For the greatest Truth of all
is that no single man may be free until all men are free. Of course, the various governments and
their registered, taxed, and legally (anti-God) controlled corporate religions are set up to catch most
of us before we may Þnd the God of Nature and become a part of Its Oneness again. As pretend,
surrogate mothers, they provide worldly retreat instead of spiritual Reality in the cold comforts of
an artiÞcial matrix (womb) of an artiÞcial person, a 501 non-proÞt (non-prophet) and completely
secular corporation where all members are silenced by the one voice of that artiÞcial, legal persona
and its doctrine and corporate by-laws. But these are not part of NatureÕs Law, I assure you. When
asked, the programmed soul will answer I am “Catholic.” I am “Muslim.” I am “Presbyterian.” I am
“Methodist.” I am “Jewish.” I am “Mormon.” I am “Christian.Ó And on it goes into inÞnityÉ These
pretended identities are imprinted Þctions, artful personas, lame excuses allowing the ego to be
stroked into an unreasonable protectionism of that id-entity while being led by the false inclusive-
ness felt by that victim of organized, corporate religion and its cult-ure. Yet none of these ßattering
titles are self-evident, self-Existent Truths. Not a one of these will answer as christ has shown us by
example (works) under the Law of God, which is simply that I am only that I am, for the scriptures
teach me to be no thing thatÕs not of GodÕs True and Natural Creation. My Life, and my name, must
not be tainted by manÕs unnatural inventions. Denominations (names) of incorporated religions, I
assure you, are not of NatureÕs Design. Such words of the spellings of the scribes and smiths are not
GodÕs Creation and certainly not of the unwritten Word (Law/Son). And these denominations
(names and titles) are certainly not in the Bible, not even the word Catholic.

And so here I am. I dedicate this work to you, to whomever’s hands this work of mine may have
passed into, with the hopes that you too seek only the Truth of all things. I can only hope that the
curse spoken of here surrounding the Bible has not tainted your ability to cogitate the knowledge I
have collected within, none of which is mine own, and that my rhetoric about this self-evident
knowledge is not so vulgar as to turn you from the path.

So let us begin here, in the realm of the gods:

!76
 —=—

“For all the gods of the nations are idols…”

—Psalms 96:5, KJB

—=—

Memorize this Psalm, for it is the key to knowledge.

But also remember that, as a society controlled by an artiÞcial law built only upon empty words
and symbols, our knowledge is therefore quite unreasonably limited by the depth of respect and
relevance given to those words and symbols. And one of those is the word god.

A scientist or mathematician imagines that he may measure the universe through the synthesizing
and equation of empty symbols, as numbers for instance, while having absolutely no actual know-
ledge or sensual proof of the Reality and Nature (Source) of what Exists within that so-called
measured space by some scientiÞc method, having only the under-standing of the symbols he uses
to calculate such a vastness of unimaginable and perpetually unending proportions that in Truth
cannot ever actually be Truly known by man. For numbers donÕt actually Exist in Nature, being
only the invention of man. Yet through these precise but completely empty symbols (empty forms)
of the Real (substance) comes man-made theories of what is the Real, which of course can never
actually Be (Exist self-evidently as) Truth. For in every aspect of the Law of Nature (Source) the self-
evident law is that similitude is never sameness. Image is never Source. Representation is never Truth.
Imagination is never actuality. A sum of numbers (symbols) or letters on paper is never that for
which its sum re-presents in Þction, any more than the mirror image of anything is the Source of its
own reßection (artiÞcial life). And what is called by the name of science (noun), for instance the
“science“ of money, is certainly not now and can never actually Be Truth.

—=—

“Science, since people must do it, IS A SOCIALLY EMBEDDED

ACTIVITY. It progresses by hunch, vision, and intuition. Much of its
change through time DOES NOT RECORD A CLOSER APPROACH
TO ABSOLUTE TRUTH, BUT THE ALTERATION OF CULTURAL
CONTEXTS THAT INFLUENCE IT SO STRONGLY. Facts are not pure
and unsullied bits of information; culture also inßuences what we see
and how we see it. THEORIES, MOREOVER, ARE NOT INEXORABLE
INDUCTIONS FROM FACTS. THE MOST CREATIVE THEORIES
ARE OFTEN IMAGINATIVE VISIONS IMPOSED UPON FACTS; the
source of imagination is also strongly cultural.”
—Stephen Jay Gould, introduction to "The Mismeasure of Man" (1981)

—=—

And so, when our ego might be subdued enough in order that our spiritual Being is emergent
without such constrictions of language and other art forms, we may Þnally acquire the most
important knowledge of all, which is that we know almost nothing of what is Real in the eternity of
all Creation as one Unending Being (verb). And while an actor may pretend to know his character
and an observer may pretend to know empathetically his subject, this pretended knowledge is of
course always false, no matter how experimentally predictable it may be. ScientiÞc knowledge is

!77
never a True knowledge of Source, only a mutual acknowledgement (theory) of description and
reaction. But a theory is also never the Source, only the best guess as to the Nature of things. The
religious belief (love) in, forced syndicalist acceptance of, and subsequent application of this false
or theoretical knowledge as legally sanctioned “fact” or “truth” is the cause of virtually all of our
collective problems.

But what is True Knowledge?



Look aroundÉ With clear eyes and a Pure heart see what around you is artiÞcial and what is of the
Nature and Design of Reality, of that which man has not touched and repurposed to his own
desires and imaginations. Are you still able to recognize and distinguish that legal, commercially
driven matrix from the Reality it re-presents? Can you still feel what is Real? Can you see the
difference between the Þctional realm of the nations and GodÕs Creation of Nature, or do you cling
to your nationality (ethnicity) insisting you are some person, some thing you are not in some place
that doesnÕt actually Exist?

—=—

“Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, YE THAT ARE

ESCAPED OF THE NATIONS: THEY HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE that set
up the wood of THEIR GRAVEN IMAGE, AND PRAY UNTO A GOD
THAT CANNOT SAVE.”
—Isaiah 45:20, KJB

—=—


For all the gods of the nations are idols…

There are three words, the penultimate words, that by the end of this work the reader should be
very clear as to their Primary and secondary meanings. And so here at the beginning, let us ask
about three of the most misunderstood words in all of our collective history.

What does the word ÒGodÓ mean?

What do the words “Jesus christ” mean?

Hint: these are trick questions, each with more than just one answer. But only one answer is True
and of the self-evident Law of Nature, while all others are only of manÕs Þction of religious belief of
false doctrines in similitude. I can promise the reader two things here: one, that clarity will be
forthcoming; and two, that the knowledge of the possibilities and use of these two words is
absolutely necessary to the comprehension of all systems of law and of Source (Nature). For these
are not religious terms at all, but words of Law, of jurisdiction, and of authority. “Religion,” in the
Nature of Reality, does not Exist. ÒReligionÓ is a word, a noun, and like all others, only the name of
one of many artful creations of man. True religious (adjective) actions (verb), however, are the
epitome of all Law. From custom to the strict legal code to that which we call as the Law of Nature,
we follow religiously (adverb) some form of law, even when that law is completely opposed to the
True God (Source) of Nature and thus of our Selves. And therefore we follow some form of ÒgodÓ
as the creator and lord of whatever law we follow.

But what is a god, really?

As it turns out, the word god is an ambiguous term that must be qualiÞed by its user so as to make
it proprietary. The use of the word god by the transliterators of the kingÕs Bible is meant to confuse.

!78
 —=—

ADONAI (LORD, MASTER)

(ad-o-noy’) Lord, Master
Strong's Reference: #h136

Use in the Bible: In the Old Testament Adonai occurs 434 times. There are heavy uses of Adonai in
Isaiah (e.g., Adonai Jehovah). It occurs 200 times in Ezekiel alone and appears 11 times in Daniel
Chapter 9. Adonai is Þrst used in Gen 15:2.

Adonai in the Septuagint: kurios - Lord, Master

Meaning and Derivation: Adonai is the verbal parallel to Yahweh and Jehovah. Adonai is plural;
the singular is ADON. In reference to God the plural Adonai is used. When the singular adon is
used, IT USUALLY REFERS TO A HUMAN LORD. ADON IS USED 215 TIMES TO REFER TO
MEN. Occasionally in Scripture and predominantly in the Psalms, the singular adon is used to
refer to God as well (cf. Exd 34:23). To avoid contravening the commandment "Thou shalt not take
the name of the LORD thy God in vain" (Exd 20:7), sometimes Adonai was used as a substitute for
Yahweh (YHWH). Adonai can be translated literally as, "my lords" (both plural and possessive).

—Excerpt from a ‘Topical index, the names of God in the Old Testament’ at the website: BlueLetterBible.com

—=—

As we ßip through the pages of the Bible, we see that the generic term ÒgodÓ is transliterated in the
place of Adonai. The word ÒgodÓ is used for the vast majority of instances where either God
(Jehovah) or men acting as gods are the actual meaning and intention of the word used. And so the
confusion this transliteration brings to the average reader causes false but certainly understandable
conclusions about the meaning and deÞnition of this word Ògod.Ó This intentional design of deceit
through conjugated illiteracy is exactly what one would expect from a kings translation of the
Bible, for the word king is also replaced by the word ÒgodÓ therein by the kings own hand, so that
the reader may mistake the unnatural, political, and false religious works and actions of men
playing, governing, and killing in the name of god (adonai) with the actual Existence and Nature of
All that is Jehovah. For when lightening strikes and ßoods overtake, it is the act of no false god.
And when a baby is born, no false god may take credit for that Creation of Life. He may only copy
its image and statistics and pretend to own its artful reßection and legal personiÞcation, its
strawman. And so the gods of today rule us in the stead of (anti-) Jehovah.

And suddenly we Þnd in the Bible that what man arrogantly blames on God (Jehovah), all the
murder, wars, and degradation towards men listed in that those many verses and books, are the
actions of men acting in the stead of (anti-) God.

The only way to Truly under-stand the full spectrum of ÒLawÓ is to legally under-stand what and
who are the gods that created and executively enforce each system of it. For the only way to
comprehend any creation is to know who or what created it. Be it of Nature or of manÕs Þctional
devices, each set of law is created (creation). Vulgarly, we may say that God Creates Source and
man re-creates Þction and technology (art) from that Source of Nature. GodÕs Creation (Nature) is
bound by the Law and Laws of Nature, including man. But the re-creations of man know no such
Law, for they are not the Natural Design of Source. And here we Þnd the greatest dilemma of our
Existence, which is how to remain under the Law of our own Existence (Source) in harmony with It
while at the same time creating and using stuff that is not of Nature (God). How do we manage
and control our desires and wants to create and use that which is adversarial to the very harmony
of Nature and our place within It? The answer to this question is to always respect Natural Law,
the Law of Source (God). For while we may never actually know or fully comprehend our own
Source, we must at the same time protect it as our God. We must be in Oneness with that Source of
our own Life and Existence. And we must treat all other parts of that Whole Oneness of Source as

!79
the Highest God, under the Highest Source of Law. This is not a Law created by man’s words or
symbols, it is the very self-evident knowledge that all Creatures already possess. But with men, the
duty is much more of a necessity, if only to cause us not to destroy our very own Source by causing
us to observe the obvious Law of Its Nature.

As for the self-appointed legal gods of the nations and their posterity, it is the intentions of those
creator gods of incorporated governments and legalistic religions that we must here uncover and
acknowledge, for the only purpose of any god (creator) of any empire is to enslave others under its
own created laws, within its own creation. While the Highest God is the Creator of men, the gods of
the nations are the creators of persons (a Þctional, legal status in the nations). Man is of blood, but
persons are only ever of words (man’s recreation). This is the false (ecclesiastical) “religion” of all
governments of all the nations of the world, for the laws of nations control only Þctional, artiÞcial
persons, places, and things (nouns/names). And all the gods of the nations are idols. Yet all of them
claim that the Supreme Being, the Highest Deity, the God of all gods and of Nature is their reason
to artiÞcially exist. And we buy it hook, line, and sinker, simply because we know not the Word of
the Highest Law of Nature (Reality), which outlaws and despises all artiÞces, Þctions, titles, and
lies of men, but especially those of the idolatrous gods of all nations. In fact, the only distinction
that can be made between man’s legalistic law (words) and the Highest Law of God (Nature in
harmony) is that one is the Law over that which is Real and the other is the pretended law over that
which is only ever artiÞcial. Thus, only by separating the moral (religious) Law that governs
without artiÞce or manÕs designs the Reality of Nature from the amoral or purposefully immoral
civil (legal) law over artiÞcial persons, places, and things (nouns/names) can the legal law (Þction)
overcome the Natural Law (Reality). Only by acting in Þction can man pretend the Law and Laws
of Nature do not apply to his legal (pretended) person. Thus, man religiously (satanically) follows
the law of artiÞcial things (words) over the Law and duty to the Reality (Nature) of all True
Existence. And so religions, as legally incorporated ÒecclesiasticalÓ corporations (artiÞcial persons)
are established as Þctions of law, as that which is under not over manÕs false legal law, we are
unwittingly made to act adversarially (satanically) to and place the Law of God (Nature) under the
authority of the Þctional, legal law of men, the idolatrous legal gods of their own Þctional creation.
And so, any legally titled and registered “religion” or “church” incorporated under man’s law is in
actuality completely Þctional, existing only legally (artiÞcially) as a design of men controlled by the
words of men, not the Word of God. For the Word of God is not a language, it is the self-Existent
and self-evident Design and Law of Nature. Knowledge of it comes not through words or other
symbology created by men, but by the complete and utter abandonment of the authority and
respect of all the Þctions of men, leaving only the spiritual and sensual harmony of Nature as the
remnant, as what remains after all lies and art forms of man are defeated. The sole purpose of these
“religions” is to draw man away from the meaning and intent of the Bible and other scriptural
tomes of history, causing men not to follow the Law (Word of God) religiously, but instead to
follow the law of man religiously while claiming to be a “member” of a false, corporate religion
(noun). In this way, the Law (Word) is never fulÞlled by any man, and men are kept enslaved to the
legal law of Þctional persons within the artful designs of the gods of all nations. Thus we are led to
act legally instead of spiritually. We worship men and symbols of Nature instead of Nature Itself. A
symbol can only be a part, or polytheism, not the whole, or monotheism. To worship Nature as all
Life and all of self-Existence in Oneness, without classifying anything by valuation in money, time,
or in levels or classes of importance, is to worship the Nature of God and Its Law. In ancient
wisdom we Þnd the concept that, if all that is True (of Reality, of Nature) is God, then there is no
ÒGod.Ó God (Source) need only be distinguished from the Þctional and artful (technological)
creations of man that are in disharmony so that God may be worshiped as Truth (in Pure Faith).
Without man, there would be only God (all of Real Creation) and nothing to challenge It.

Still more important is the knowledge that the only way to escape from under the legal status and
standing (under-standing) of these legal gods and their artiÞcial realm of legal and ecclesiastical
juris-diction, a word that means to say what law is by diction and to dictate what the Latin jure or
English law is, is to spiritually under-stand what the True God Is as compared to these Godless
Þctions of positive law standing in their own false deity, and to act accordingly and opposed to
those institutions under the Ultimate Authority of God’s Law of Nature without respect to all other

!80
forms of the artiÞcially created ÒlegalÓ law of man. This is the essential hierarchy of all law. It is the
choice so often spoken about but never comprehended. Good vs. evil. Reality vs. Þction. God vs.
satan. Light vs. darkness. And to be clear, no man may ever comprehend any form of law until the
Highest substance of God is acknowledged as the Highest Law-Giver and Creator of all of Nature,
including being the Creator of all men. This will become clear and self-evident as we progress,
requiring not some empty belief in any form or image of what ÒGodÓ Is but merely an under-
standing of the foundations of the legal systems and matrix codes of law as created by those
ÒnobleÓ psychopaths that believe they are GodÕs chosen People and that their kings and popes are
actually self-proclaimed God-heads, as false gods on Earth. Perspective is everything. And without
gaining the perspective of your enemy you may never defeat it. The enemy will always force his
own ÒreligionÓ upon you, for only then may he force his own law upon you, a law that he says is
ordained by God (Jehovah) Itself. Remember, the god always comes before the law, and so oneÕs
choice of god is also, consciously or unconsciously, oneÕs choice of law.

To be clear, as I am not your enemy, I offer no religion or system of manÕs law in this work. I offer
only what is the self-evident Truth of all things so that those false words and imaginary systems of
law and religion (nouns) may be defeated utterly in your own mind, so that you may Þnd your
own Nature and place within It again. For to Þnd God is not to Þnd religion, but to feel and follow
religiously the only self-evident Law of the Nature (Source) of all things, as the God of all that is in
self-Existence. ItÕs not to just believe with spiritual emptiness and without works in the title or name
of some image of god formed (anthropomorphized/personiÞed) by men, but instead to become
and remain Purely a part of Nature and Its Highest, self-evident Law, to Live only in self-Existent
Truth without lies.

—=—

"There is no God when there is nothing but God."

--Lao Tzu, or Laozi ("Old MasterÓ), a legendary Þgure (and thus an honorary title), said to be the founder of philosophical Taoism

—=—

The greatest enemy of man is not merely false knowledge but the revelation of it, as the belief (love)
in what is not Real, and the allowance of that false knowledge to guide our actions. This is religion,
in whatever form, which leads to religious (customary/ceremonial) behavior. False knowledge is
the fruit of evil, and is also called as satanism, as that which is adversarial to the only Truth of God
(Reality). If it helps the reader to personify Good and evil into God and satan, so be it. Visualization
is certainly a tool of learning, though the magic of visual re-presentations and personiÞcations
should never be allowed to have more authority or ÒfaithÓ than the Reality they represent and
attempt to symbolize. The force of the organized church is strong in its doctrinal delusions that
stand adversarial to Bible scriptures. But do not allow these artful images with no substance to
cloud your understanding of what these words actually mean. The proper noun ÒSatanÓ means
only that which is adversarial to Jehovah (the self-evident Nature of Reality). The word evil (lies/
artiÞce) means that which is adversarial to good (Truth/Reality). ItÕs not nearly as complicated as
we are taught. Satan is said to be the dark king of lies. God is said to be the Light of Truth. But
remember that these are merely the words and powers of men. No image or idol is necessary to
believe in (love) God (self-existent and self-evident Truth), for a picture or painting drawn of what
is the unimagined fullness of Jehovah (all of eternal Existence) is only a snapshot of Truth and the
Nature of Reality personiÞed into art (lies). Existence cannot be measured in a single moment of
time as singularly perspective imagery, for Existence is eternal and ever-changing. No image or
idol of satan is necessary, for a picture of satan is only the artiÞcial version of forced truth, as lies
told and legally and/or religiously accepted in order to hide away the Nature of Reality and
conquer it. Satan is not at all hard to see, for the result of its persuasion and temptation is all
around us as well, covering up with its art the Truth of God's Nature. We all live in a den of iniquity
and lies. Its called the legal system, and it is seen as all that is dystopian and inharmonious with the
Natural Design. The very belief (love) that God may be seen in some singularly imagined form of

!81
appearance and in show as the form of man’s desires is what allows men to pretend to be gods. If
the Highest substance of God (Jehovah) is all things Real, all the Universe and Nature and every
Creature within, then no artful form created by man can possibly capture that ultimate and self-
existent Truth of God. These images of what is unimaginable are the foundational magic of all
religions, nations, and their idolatrous gods (creators/founders). To see God, one merely need take
a walk in Its untainted Nature. To walk with God is to walk in harmony with God's Nature
(Reality), and to embrace It utterly without self-deception.

This work is designed as evidence of this Reality (God) so often hidden by the Þctional matrix of
manÕs created designs against It. It is an expose on the legal Þctions of law that serve only to
challenge God’s Nature, Design, and Law. For it is only this adversarial (satanic) creation and
respect by men of the legalized truth of lies that gives power to the Þctional things of government
and thus to the authority of government over Þctional things. To live legally (in spiritual death); to
live in an imaginary world (jurisdiction) adversarial to one's own True Nature and best interest is
the very nature of satanism. It is a living death, the walking brain-dead. And let’s be clear, all
creations of man’s law, religious (ecclesiastical) or governmental, are only ever unnatural legal
Þctions (lies).

But what came Þrst, the jurisdiction (realm) or the law that is dictated and enforced within it; the
chicken or the egg?

Strangely enough, the answer is neither! For one cannot Þctionally exist without the other. A god
must Þrst be Þctionally created in the minds of men before that magistrate may recreate and dictate
its own law and assign its own juris-diction for the use of its agents. In other words, there must be a
supernatural “creator” before any creation of jurisdiction or law may take place. And these legal
gods are only constituted by men and according to their fabled genealogy, their blood inheritance.
The imaginary legal right (juris) to create (dictate) a Þctional place (district/nation/state) and to
become land-lord (legal god) over it, this is the essence of jurisdiction. It is the creator and the
creation all rolled up in one intangible Þction of art, a virtual reality. It is their sincere hope that we,
the common multitude, never wake up to see the difference, to see through the spiritual blinders
that they have created. The whole system of law is in fact based on the concept of false gods, the
God that Is the Nature of True Existence, and the usurper gods that are purely pretended, Þctional
characters of their own making.

In the beginning, the legally established and ordained gods created their own Þctional realm and
placed it over the True Realm of Nature, like covering all of Existence in an invisible plastic wrap,
so that no common man may touch that Nature of Reality except through the legal personage and
rented property of the church and state.

JURIS - Latin. Of right; of law. (Black4)

DICTATE - To order or instruct what is to be said or written. To pronounce, WORD BY

WORD, what is meant to be written by another. (Black4)

REALM - A kingdom; a COUNTRY. (Black4)


REALM - noun - relm. [Latin rex, king, whence regalis, royal.] 1. A royal JURISDICTION OR
EXTENT OF GOVERNMENT; a kingdom; a king's DOMINIONS; as the realm of England.
2. Kingly government; as the realm of bees. [Unusual.] (Webs1828)

JURISDICTION - noun - [Latin jurisdictio; jus, juris, law, and dictio, from dico, to pronounce.] 1.
The legal power of authority of doing justice in cases of complaint; the power of executing
the laws and distributing justice. Thus we speak of certain suits or actions, or the cognizance
of certain crimes being within the jurisdiction of a court, that is, within the LIMITS of their
authority or commission. Inferior courts have jurisdiction of debt and trespass, or of smaller
offenses; the supreme courts have jurisdiction of treason, murder, and other high crimes.

!82
 Jurisdiction is SECULAR OR ECCLESIASTICAL. 2. Power of governing or legislating. The
legislature of one state can exercise no jurisdiction in another. 3. The power or RIGHT OF
EXERCISING AUTHORITY. NATIONS CLAIM EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION ON THE
SEA, to the extent of a marine league from the main land or shore. 4. The LIMIT within
which power may be exercised. Jurisdiction, in its most general sense, is THE POWER TO
MAKE, DECLARE OR APPLY THE LAW; when conÞned to the judiciary department, it is
what we denominate the JUDICIAL POWER, THE RIGHT OF ADMINISTERING JUSTICE
THROUGH THE LAWS, by the means which the laws have provided for that purpose.
Jurisdiction is LIMITED TO PLACE OR TERRITORY, TO PERSONS, or to particular
SUBJECTS. (Webs1828)

SUBJECT - Contracts. The THING which is the OBJECT OF AN AGREEMENT. This term is
used in the laws of Scotland. (Bouv1856)

SUBJECT - PERSONS, government. AN INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF A NATION, WHO IS

SUBJECT TO THE LAWS; this term is USED IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO CITIZEN,
WHICH IS APPLIED TO THE SAME INDIVIDUAL WHEN CONSIDERING HIS
POLITICAL RIGHTS. 2. In monarchical governments, by subject is meant one who owes
permanent allegiance to the monarch. Vide Body politic. (Bouv1856)

SUBJECTION - The obligation of one or more PERSONS TO ACT at the discretion, or

ACCORDING TO THE JUDGMENT AND WILL OF OTHERS. 2. Subjection is either
PRIVATE or PUBLIC. By the former (private) is meant the subjection to the authority of
PRIVATE PERSONS; as, of children to their parents, of apprentices to their masters, and the
like. By the latter (public) is understood the subjection to the authority of PUBLIC
PERSONS. (Bouv1856)

—=—

In manÕs legally driven Þctional realm, we act according to what manÕs temporary judgement and
punishment would be in a legal, jurisdictional court, not by GodÕs Þnal judgement; not by Truth. To
be a subject of government is to be considered not as a Living man (verb) but as a named, artiÞcial
thing (noun). This is a bit confusing until we realize the difference between a man (Reality) and the
person (noun/legal name) of man as his legal (artful) re-presentation and identity (strawman)
within that legal realm. The person is never our True Self, and is always the property under
contract of some devil (evil genius) and its design (art). No man is bound to man’s law unless he is
bound to another man or governmentÕs proprietary person.

—=—

“Therefore the law is slacked, and judgment doth never go forth: FOR
THE WICKED DOTH COMPASS ABOUT THE RIGHTEOUS;
THEREFORE WRONG JUDGMENT PROCEEDETH.”
—Habakkuk 1:4, KJB

—=—

Let’s face facts here… If our legal id-entity can be stolen as what is labeled as “identity theft,” then
obviously our legal person (id-entity) is not our own True and Natural Self! This separation of man
and legal person (status), by this statement alone, should now be a self-evident Truth in the mind of
the reader. What can be stolen is only a property of manÕs Þctions, never that which is in the
ambiguity of self-Existence. The devilÕs greatest magic trick was in personifying the identity of man
and projecting it into a contractual obligation as a third person (strawman character), so as to cause 




!83
that man to obey and act according to the law of legal Þction (conÞrmed lies) that are attached to
that artiÞcial, legal id-entity. But it had to be done. The direct connection to and fear of NatureÕs
God and Law had to be severed in order to control us.

It is the difference between Neo and Thomas Anderson, a man virtually plugged into a legally coded
matrix as a simulation of Reality, one so seemingly Real that the man is fooled into believing he is
(in love with) his false self, his mirror image, the artiÞcial character (person) re-presented in that
artiÞcially coded Matrix. For it is the person (vessel/avatar) that is the slave of that Þctional realm,
and the man is contractually bound to act in said false persona when participating in that legal
realm and matrix code. He cannot be seen in the artiÞcial, legal realm without an artiÞcial, legal
name and other signs and marks of traceable id-entity. Only when we consider ourselves as
opposed to this cartoon persona as a false re-presentation of ourselves can we contemplate Reality
from Þction. And so this word subject, a term of art that does not Exist as a Real object in Nature, is
only ever a Þctional persona attached voluntarily to the man (via contract, as a contracted legal dis-
ease) by his imaginary acceptance of the agreement of a member-ship to the artiÞce (through
citizenship, etc). The person is a virtual (invisible) plug connecting us to that Þctional legal realm.
Without a person (legal status) man cannot be seen or make an ÒappearanceÓ therein any more
than a cartoon can climb out of its artiÞcial, moving picture realm. It is only our mind that can be
plugged in, nothing else. But the body will inevitably follow the mind, and so the soul is also
trapped in those that construct of lies in surety to evil (artiÞce). This is called hell. Hell is being
temporary, being trapped in a mind-controlling performance debt owed to organized criminals.

To be clear, man as a Creation of and in GodÕs Nature, has no legal jurisdiction and never will. Only
persons legally exist there. Man (as GodÕs Creation) is not a Þction, and can never actually exist or
have actual (Real) power in such a Þctional place, though he may still be called as the word of art
ÒmanÓ (slave). Man does not and cannot legally exist, for what is legal can only be artiÞcial. Man is
part of Reality (Jehovah). Man is of Nature (God) not legalism (Þction). A person is an unnatural
creation of Þction, not part of the Creation of God. Perspective alters the meaning of all words,
turning their Real meanings into Þctional art forms. A master calls his slave as his man, and so too
should all of Nature, including man, recognize and call Jehovah as the only True Master. Call It
Mother Nature for all I care, itÕs just a Þctional name, but only as long as your worship is based on
the Reality of GodÕs Nature (the masculine and the feminine in True balance) and not just the vain
religions and cultural Þctions of men. No Life Exists in Þction, no air and no water and no land. It
is incapable of supporting Life. Nothing of Nature can be known as Þction just as nothing of Þction
can actually Exist in the Reality of Nature, and so nothing under GodÕs Law of Nature can possibly
respect anything in that alternate, Þctional realm of legalism and its Þctional gods. Of course, the
opposite is True, for the Þction opposes and is adversarial to what is Real. Reality and legal Þction
are akin to the notion of God and satan, having standing diametrically in opposition to one another.
Man cannot be a Þction of law (person) any more than a Þction of law can be a man of God, for
man self-evidently contains a self-Existent and autonomous Source and animation of Life. And so a
man cannot ever actually Be in any legal, artiÞcial jurisdiction, for man is not artiÞcial, and the
jurisdiction of the artiÞcial law created by man only applies to artiÞcial Þctions of that same law
(names/nouns of persons, places, and things) as created by that Þction. A cartoon character can only
artiÞcially exist (as art) and have motion (breathe) in a cartoon setting controlled by man, in a
cartoon jurisdiction, but never in Reality. It has no Life Force, no self-Existence, no Life of its own. It
simply cannot ever Exist in or effect GodÕs Creation of Nature, except in the imaginations of menÕs
minds. ManÕs Þctional person (citizen-ship) is like wearing an artiÞcial law-suit, one magically
charmed and clothing him in false appearance within that Þctional world. We wear this virtual
halloween costume for one and only one purpose, to hide our True Selves. And like children at
halloween, we appear in these costumes of person-hood in court without conscious thought as to
why we are doing so, because our customs apparently say we should do so. These inventions of the
law have no tangible substance, only false legalistic form and image, as descriptive words with no
substance. They do not Exist in Nature. They are not Creations of God. This oppositional state of
being is not merely a religious notion, itÕs an obvious paradoxical impossibility in Reality that
stands at the foundation of all Law. These two opposing realms cannot be mixed without dis-
respecting each other, no matter how much force is used. They cannot coexist without the dire

!84
consequences we are suffering from today. Synthesis (sin), as the mixing of the Real and the
artiÞcial together, causes dis-ease. Thus when we say Þguratively that God is the Creator of all
Nature (Reality) and nothing else, we need only to keep this as our vantage point to an un-
breakable and Highest Law, so that any other re-creation of man in legal artiÞce cannot effect our
Reality by causing us to believe in (love) that which is not a part of the Oneness of Life that is
Reality (GodÕs Creation). One need not believe in some image, form, or name of ÒGodÓ to
comprehend the importance and necessity in Law of this distinction, for man can only be ruled by
other men acting as ÒgodsÓ if we accept the Þction and authority of their artiÞcial realm and
jurisdictions over that of GodÕs Nature of Reality. The substance of the Highest meaning of this
word God is in all that Exists in Nature despite manÕs artful forms and inventions recreated by the
Þctions of the i-magi-nation. Again, this is not religion, this is very the foundation of Law.


When I say here that this is the foundation, I literally mean that no man may Truly under-stand and
comprehend the legal law unless it is compared with God's Law. Both realms exist according to
both laws. To deny God's Realm of Nature and Its Law, in other words to deny what Is Jehovah, is
literally to deny Reality. When reading the Bible, the intent of this word Jehovah must be
comprehended and understood, so that Its meaning is undeniable even to the ardent skeptic. The
Bible is not written to give man a choice to believe in (love) Jehovah, it is written speciÞcally to tell
the story of It and Its Law. To be clear, the Existence of Existence Itself (Jehovah) is simply not up
for debate. To deny self-Existence is a fools errand. And yet this artful, delusional state of denial is
the only way that this adversarial, opposing legal Þction realm can exist. To cause man to deny his
own Existence as part of God is the ultimate self-deceit and defeat of oneÕs mind, body, and soul. Yet
the legal systems one and only weakness is that the Þction cannot exist without man, and that man
cannot Exist without God. Without Reality, there can be no Þction. Without Truth there can be no
lies. Without Nature there can be no art. ArtiÞciality (i.e., ÒsatanÓ) simply cannot Create Reality.
And so unless man Þnds the Light of God's Nature and Word (Son/Law) in this story of moral
allegory, we will all be consumed by the darkness of Its adversary, where there can be no True Light
or Life at all. We will self-destruct. We will die as cut ßowers, gasping in a pointless struggle for
Life without roots to LifeÕs Source.

Unfortunately, this death march includes participation in all governments, systems of law, and
religions created by man. GodÕs Law of Nature is nowhere to be found or practiced in any of these
artful, legal, and ecclesiastical Þctions, despite the fact that they are commonly pretended to be
founded upon scriptural Law. Their only purpose is to create mythical gods (anti-God systems) on
earth that are militarily protected by their own creations of artiÞcial law. Of these Þctional creations
of man, all are opposed to the Nature of Reality, for it is their very purpose to legalize sin and
bypass the unenforceable (voluntary) duties of the Natural Law. They seek in all members (agents)
the abandonment of choice through the implementation of systematic causality.

Strangely enough, this will be taken as offensive to many members of these incorporated
organizations that love (believe in) their own ßattering titles, and possibly to all who are citizen-
ships (slaves) of them in mammon (artiÞcial valuation). Title equals artful (false) value. And these
are all but artiÞcial legal statuses that both beneÞt and protect he who subscribes to their Þctions so
as to break with that which is the Highest or Natural Law and duty to all of our fellow man. When
man id-entiÞes his True Self within these artiÞcial constructs (names and titles of persons, places,
and things), he can only act against his very own Nature and Law of Creation, against his True Self.
He is tricked into acting agenticly against his own interests and to support those of his captor. Be-
lief in (love of) lies causes man to lie on behalf of those institutionalized Þctions of man, justifying
their artiÞcial existence and protecting the Þctional beneÞts, licenses, and false personas they
provide to each of their believers (lovers), while assuming the role of its ÒsubjectÓ and acting out
only its law in opposition to that of the Highest Law of Nature. In short, man defends the evil thing
(Þction) not because he is justiÞed in doing so, but because his mind has been seized (purchased/
conquered) and caused to identify with that Þction as if he (oneÕs True Self) was actually that
Þctional third person, as if he were part of its body politic (corporation), and as if it were actually
Real. And so any perceived attack upon the Þction is taken Òpersonally,Ó as if calling any corporate
ÒchurchÓ operating in a legalized system of mammon and tribute to the state as evil is to somehow

!85
call the man attending the church in person as evil. A useful idiot, maybe, but this is also how good
men are fooled into joining the US federal district military, by being made to believe (brainwashed)
that they are part of the beneÞted, Þctional ÒpeopleÓ of the United States instead of merely its
political slaves. And so we must defend that supposedly sacred (cursed) piece of paper that de-
scribes it into false existence. After all, it is where the money ßows from. And it is where our name
was birthed into its Þctional persona. If we can be tricked into believing that we have a Real stake
in that legal Þction, then we can be made to protect that imaginary stake (cross) instead of pulling it
up to follow christ. We are all mercenaries in this way, protecting the Þctional hand of the devil that
feeds us and pays us off for looking the other way. Likewise, if we believe (love) the incorporated
legal church more than we love (believe in) the Word (Son) of God, we can be made to protect the
church and state over Nature (Creation), allowing untold destruction and devastation to our own
True Source and Home.

Like governments, religions are only constituted corporations created by legal means. They are
only words on paper. And yet their buildings, alters, and other corporate assets in mammon make
the paper Þction seem Real and even holy and sacred, while actually being cursed. But as the brave
reader will discover should his or her cognitive dissonance be defeated here at the beginning, it is
the required law of these gods of Þction, of governments and religions, that only by submitting to
subjection and obligation in a system of virtual slavery can these legal beneÞts be enjoyed by their
subscribing members.

Remember what the Bible says about the scribes?

—=—

“…and the CHIEF Priests and the SCRIBES sought how they might take
him by CRAFT, and put him to DEATH.”
—Mark 14:1, KJB

—=—

Remember that the story of christ is the story of every man, and that we are all made spiritually
dead under the spells of the priest-class and the scribes’ spell-craft.

As we will discuss in more detail, we must know that all legally created persons (statuses) are
dead. In other words, they are dead to Jehovah, and thus not of Nature or Its Law. What is legal is
indeed a free radical, being not of the Source of or grounded in Nature, and more speciÞcally
having no Natural Law duty to all others to cause no harm as the foundation of Law. Fiction is
never Alive, for Þction and its law knows no actual Life and Exists nowhere in NatureÕs Design.
And yet, from the perspective of that closed-loop legal matrix system of law, all private men not
under a Þctional, legal person-hood are also considered as nameless outlaws towards the civil, legal
realm. An out-law is one not under but outside of the legal law, as one not plugged-in (controllable)
by that Þctional code, its jurisdiction, and its agents. To be without person is to be without artiÞcial
life. To sub-scribe to anything is to stand under those priestly scribes and their juris-diction, under
the diction (words) of their law (juris)! It is to be spiritually dead to the True Law of GodÕs Nature,
and to be instead thoughtlessly, commercially driven as human capital in a legal structure of
capitalism under a money-based system of mammon (artiÞcial valuation). The pursuit of money is
the pursuit of Þction, of nothingness. This is spiritual death, but is also the epitome of a legal, civil
life.

The word craft as used in this scripture refers to trickery through deceit and guile, as witchcraft
spellings, the craft of word-magic. For a scribe deals only in the authority of his own proprietary
words and a priest preaches only empty words in a public ceremony of false show. As we will




!86
learn, words and words alone are the tools of the craft of these legal gods of governments and
religions that induce all men into their sterile ßocks, and cause us all a spiritual death through legal
means.

SUB - A Latin preposition, denoting UNDER OR BELOW, used in English as a preÞx, to

express a subordinate degree… (Webs1828)

SCRIBE - noun - [Latin scriba, from scribo, to write; formed probably on the root of grave,
scrape, scrub. The Þrst writing was probably engraving on wood or stone.] 1. In a general
sense, A WRITER. Hence, 2. A notary; A PUBLIC WRITER. 3. In ecclesiastical meetings and
associations in America, A SECRETARY OR CLERK; one who records the transactions of an
ecclesiastical body. 4. In Scripture and the Jewish history, A CLERK OR SECRETARY TO
THE KING. Seraiah was scribe to king David. 2 Samuel 8:17. 5. An ofÞcer who ENROLLED
or kept the rolls of the army, and called over the names and reviewed them. 2 Chronicles
24:11. 2 Kings 25:19. 6. A WRITER AND A DOCTOR OF THE LAW; a man of learning; one
skilled in the law; ONE WHO READ AND EXPLAINED THE LAW TO THE PEOPLE. Ezra
8:1. - verb transitive - TO MARK by a model or rule; TO MARK SO AS TO FIT ONE PIECE
TO ANOTHER; a term used by carpenters and joiners. (Webs1828)

SUBSCRIBE - verb transitive - [Latin subscribo; sub and scribo, to write.] 1. TO SIGN with one's
own hand; TO GIVE CONSENT TO SOMETHING WRITTEN, OR TO BIND ONE'S SELF
BY WRITING ONE'S NAME BENEATH; as, parties subscribe a COVENANT OR
CONTRACT; a man subscribes A BOND or ARTICLES of AGREEMENT. 2. To attest by
writing one's NAME beneath; as, ofÞcers subscribe their ofÞcial acts; and secretaries and
clerks subscribe copies of records. 3. TO PROMISE TO GIVE BY WRITING ONE'S NAME;
as, each man subscribed ten dollars or ten shillings. 4. TO SUBMIT. [Not in use.] - verb
intransitive - To promise to give a certain sum BY SETTING ONE'S NAME TO A PAPER.
The paper was offered and many subscribed. 1. To assent; as, I could not subscribe to his
opinion. (Webs1828)

—=—

We must realize that the True purpose of a sincere and Pious preacher (scribe) of the Bible is to read
God's Law as that which is the Natural Law to the common people as it is written in scripture and
despite all other doctrines and pretended authorities and inducements in mammon of any
institution of Religion, to those unskilled in the Word (Law). But todays university and seminary-
taught preachers (employees) are not scribes (skilled) in the actual, spiritual, unwritten Word of
Law, and instead misdirect the common people to follow the legal Òlaw of the land,Ó which is only
man's Þctional creation. They pay for their ÒeducationÓ to be certiÞed in false indoctrinations, a sin
spoken of sharply in the scripturesÉ

SIMONY - noun - [From Simon Magus, WHO WISHED TO PURCHASE THE POWER OF
CONFERRING THE HOLY SPIRIT. Acts 8:1] THE CRIME OF BUYING OR SELLING
ECCLESIASTICAL PREFERMENT; OR THE CORRUPT PRESENTATION OF ANY ONE
TO AN ECCLESIASTICAL BENEFICE OF MONEY OR REWARD. By Stat. 31 Elizabeth, c. 6.
severe penalties are enacted against this crime. (Webs1828)

—=—

What priest in what corporate religion did not suffer to pay for his appointment and employment
therein? What church, what seminary, and what university is therefore not acting in Simony?

To be clear, these modern priests are ecclesiastical hirelings of the legal, religious corporations of
the state (nation/king), and so do the bidding of those legal gods (creator of corporations), the idols
of the nations. And most often itÕs intentionally innocent men that do so, without contemplation of 




!87
their own part as useful idiots that were publicly educated in church doctrine (the false law and
religions of men), but not in the intent of the True Author of the unwritten Law of timeless and
priceless Nature.

The name gameÉ No spelling can be cast without a Þctional name (noun) to afÞx it to. Legalese
only sticks to conÞrmed legal persons, places, and things (names/nouns), as do ALL ßattering, paid-
for titles in the priesthood and its ecclesia. Without language, no legal law would exist. Without the
contractual word-magic of the priest-class of scribes and of attorneys no law would be binding, and
no legal (anti-God) dis-ease would be able to be applied to manÕs person. Inversely, the Natural
Law is self-Evident and thus called as the Òunwritten law,Ó as it needs no words to Exist or be
known instinctually by man.

All of these legally created inventions and incorporated institutions are only designed to cheat man
out from under his Source; to take man away from his Creator and thus his very own Nature by
Þguratively separating him from the actual land (Creation) through the craft of word-magic. The
spelling of legal (artful) words into sentences is the craft of Legalese. Remember, prisoners receive
sentences as a curse or punishment. The question is, can any legalese (art) not be of evil (artful/
Þctional) intent?

—=—

SENTENCE - (verb transitive) :

“1. To pass or PRONOUNCE THE JUDGEMENT OF A COURT ON; TO

DOOM; as, TO SENTENCE A CONVICT to death, to transportation, or
to imprisonment. 2. TO CONDEMN; TO DOOM TO PUNISHMENT.”
ÑWebsterÕs 1828 Dictionary of Law, deÞnition of ÔsentenceÕ (Webs1828)

—=—

And so the reader has a choice: stop reading now and continue in the invisible chains of the doom
of birth and subsequent willing servitude under that satanic brood, or keep reading and discover
the story of your own voluntary enslavement in oppression by the legal means and languages of
men acting as the idolatrous gods of the nations. As in scripture, so in Life, and so too with this
work, man always has a choice.

—=—

“For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed IS

THE VERY DEFINITION OF SLAVERY.”
—Jonathan Swift

—=—

“VOTING IS THE FOUNDATIONAL ACT THAT BREATHES LIFE

INTO THE PRINCIPLE OF THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.”
—DeForest Soaries

—=—

!88
It’s a catch 22, you see. For if only 1 person votes, this is still a sign of the democratic system, and so
consent of the governed is cast by a single ballot. And the silence is deafening. We consider voting a
right, and yet we never consider it to be a form of consent. The right to vote is the right to consent
to what we vote or do not vote for. When we vote for president of the United States, we actually
vote for the entire governmental and military staff that president appoints, and also the appoint-
ments of all of those already appointed ofÞcials. To vote for a single president is to vote for millions
of federal employees and the Cabinet staff that president chooses. This is insanity, for only under a
tyranny is the entire government appointed! There are only two elected ofÞcials in the federal
government. Yet there are around 4,230,000 government personnel today (2013 Þgure, from OfÞce of
Personnel Management website). That’s 1.5% of the population, and direct federal employees hold
over 2% of all jobs in the entirety of the 50 states.

But most importantly, let us note Johnathan Swift’s statement above that slavery is the opposite of
consent of the governed, and that no nation exists as an involuntary slave nation. Employment to
government and in its name (property) is certainly a form of consent, without question. In other
words, no man acting in a United States person (legal status) or other national citizen-ship is an
involuntary slave, but necessarily and by law a volunteer. To consent is to volunteer to the doctrine
of master and servant. And again, by reason alone, no man would vote for his master/principal
unless he consented to the fact that he is a servant (agent) to that god.

In America, however, we are sold that our politicians serve “the People.” And indeed they do. They
serve the private landholders of each state in protection of their private estates against the
common, landless people. For it was they whose forefathers ordained and established the United
States for their own behalf in heirship, as the very corporation those legislators work for today in
the posterity of those original founders it was created for. But make no mistake, for the very law
and hierarchy of agency states that the agent by necessity is always willingly serving its principal,
no exceptions. A citizenship (agent) cannot also be a principal. This is a foundation of law. And so
no matter what we uncover within this work, always remember that every evil is done through
each of our own powers of voluntary consent.

The author realizes the severity and acridity of these seemingly slanderous charges. Though self-
evident with even a token bit of due diligence in research and prayer in spiritual meditation, this
work will ultimately destroy any doubt that what has been written here thus far is not merely an
opinionated perception of pre-tended truth, but our collectively unwavering and undeniable
Reality.

Sadly, one must be aware of something before he may consent to it, and so feigned ignorance is no
excuse.

—=—

“WHATEVER IN CREATION EXISTS without my knowledge EXISTS

WITHOUT MY CONSENT.”
―Cormac McCarthy, author of ÔBlood Meridian, or the Evening Redness in the West’

—=—

What is of God, what is Nature (Creation) needs not the consent of man to Exist, only the respect of
that negative duty of God’s Law to do no harm to and not interfere with the self-Existence, self-
evidence, and well-being of all other Life. In other words, what comes into Existence in Reality is
not the result of any manÕs choice. But governments, religions, and other corporations (artiÞcial
persons) are purely the Þctional, artful creations of man, and so too are the actions or ÒbusinessÓ
they take against other men, Nature, and Its Law.

!89
In this author’s opinion, it is the point where good men are no longer willing to die for what they
hold as right and lawful that man becomes his own worst enemy. For at this point he becomes a
patient of the agents of evil. The greatest trick these devil’s have played upon us is to cause us to be
willing agents that patiently participate in our own self-destruction, for the word agent is the
antonym of the word patient. And nothing is worse than a patriotic patient cheering for his own
corruptor. This word patient will be looked at later, but make no mistake that only one patient of
evil men and their practices would allow this consent dialectic to happen.

—=—

“There comes a time when SILENCE IS BETRAYAL.”

—Martin Luther King Jr.; 1929–1968, sermon at the Ebenezer Baptist Church, April 30, 1967.

—=—

“SILENCE IS THE DOOR OF CONSENT.”

—Berber proverb

—=—

“I shall assume that YOUR SILENCE GIVES CONSENT.”

—Plato

—=—

“Thus, silence gives consent; HE OUGHT TO HAVE SPOKEN WHEN

HE WAS ABLE TO.” 
—Latin proverb, “Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit”

—=—

“All that is necessary for evil to triumph is THAT GOOD MEN DO

NOTHING.” 
—Edmund Burke; 1729–1797, Irish political philosopher

—=—

“NOTHING STRENGTHENS AUTHORITY SO MUCH AS SILENCE.”

—Leonardo de Vinci

—=—

“UNIVERSAL SILENCE must be taken to imply THE CONSENT OF

THE PEOPLE.”
—Jean Jacques Rousseau

—=—

!90
 —=—

“The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, 


but by those who watch them WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING.”
—Albert Einstein

—=—

To this date, I have not met one public person that knows how to withdraw their consent to any
government ofÞce, bill, or employee. Some believe they have done so while others spend countless
hours drafting pointless legal documents while still believing that system is their own to change.
The trick, the legalese word-magic is much more dubious though. For when consent is assumed,
there is no way to withdraw it. The assumption of consent of the governed is assigned not to any
individual event of government but to the entire ad-venture of its own person. Man (the acting
agent) is assumed to consent to everything government (the creator god and principal) does when
he operates in the person (property) of government. In other words, until man overcomes his
strawman, quitclaims it, and never uses its name, number, mark, beneÞts, and rights again, then
that which is governed (the person) will continue to be the sponge that drains the manÕs (subjectÕs)
consent for his entire public life. But to comprehend this as True, one must Þrst recognize and know
thyself, and under-stand that a nation only governs (controls) the Þctional persons (legal statuses) it
creates within its own jurisdiction and law. It is this connection to that false persona, as the ad-
mixture of the Pure name with the artiÞcial surname, that is the voluntary act. To stop volunteer-
ing, and thus to stop automatically consenting as one of the governed, one must stop acting as
something one is not. Be nothing. Be what you were born into GodÕs Nature and Law to be, and
add nothing to that innocence of Pure Life. Live a simple Life without Þction.

Perhaps the most important verses in the scriptures about christ are the ones most ignored by the
church. For to admit to the Truth of their own celebrated Source, the Bible, would be to admit to the
false nature of each legally incorporated religion (artiÞcial person) and, more speciÞcally, each
unique and adversarial religious post-doctrine to those scriptures. For what the christ character
states in Matthew is simply that what He himself says is nothing more and nothing less than the
Word of God. Word and Son are synonymous words in this context, and so to say christ is the Son of
God is actually to say christ is the Word of God personiÞed into a moral story of Law. Translated
into English though still said to be the unwritten Law, we may call this story as the Law of God, or
the Natural Law, which stands in such beautiful and obvious self-evidence that Its Truth cannot be
disputed but by artiÞcial, legal means. Lies, in other words, conÞrmed and ratiÞed as false truths
and Þctional laws, are used as a matrix system to hide the Real Truth and separate the moral Law
from the legalÉ and thatÕs the point. Fiction (lies) can only challenge, though never win over, the
Reality of Nature Itself. Eventually, the legal dis-ease of Þction (loved/believed-in lies) will kill the
Nature of Its Living patient on a cultural and health-wise basis, as we are seeing today with the fall
of man in to ever more unnatural means, ways, and disease.

Many observers are exclaiming these modern times to be yet another scientiÞcally considered
Òextinction level eventÓ in a long history of such events. Others insist that the great ßood (of dis-
ease both physical and mental) of Biblical proportions is upon us. I can accept the Þrst as an Act of
God. But to die of oneÕs own induced state of ignorance-based dis-ease simply because we insist on
(individually) refusing to follow the very Law of our own self-evident Nature (God) is quite
unacceptable, and the main reason for my own personal sacriÞces towards the creation of this
voluminous work. We must change or we must, by the Laws that rule over all of Nature, cease to
Exist.

So that we are perfectly clear as to what any legally named (denominated) ÒChristianÓ religion
actually is and is not, we must continue to deÞne terms. Firstly, anything of a legal origin has its
spirit, and thus any Natural notion of spirituality, stripped from its purpose. Fictional corporations

!91
have and can never have any Real spirit or soul, nor their own actual mind or body. They aren’t
Real. Only something Living has such a spirit. The legal realm is speciÞcally designed to steal
man's connection to his Self, to his own spirit. Legality is always artiÞcial, never of Nature, and this
above all else makes legal religions inherently false. For True Religious actions are Purely Spiritual,
and inversely excludes all legal, artiÞcial considerations of manÕs art and law. And so right away
we know that all religions incorporated as Ònon-proÞtÓ persons under any nation are false (art),
simply because they are legal creations; not a Creation of God but part of the i-magi-nation of man.
Inversely, True Piety is the worship of Creation and Its Creator as Oneness; the worship of Nature
and Its Permanent and self-evident Laws without artful words or masonic buildings. This is not at
all difÞcult to understand, and is not disputable or debatable once True knowledge is attained and
under-stood. No man can deny the very Real difference between acting in Truth religiously (verb)
and that of being a ÒmemberÓ (ßattering title/Þctional status) of an established legal corporation
called as the legal term ÒreligionÓ (noun) in name only without acts, works, and a Charitable
lifestyle. No man can deny that a building called legally as a ÒchurchÓ (noun) is not the same as
being part of the church (ßock) of the followers of christ in continual motion and action and
without retirement. One is built by hands in masonry and one is of Purely moral action (verb). One
is temporal and secular to the world, the other is of Love in a spirituality not part of this world. A
corporate member of a church (noun) calling him or herself (in legal persona) as a ÒChristianÓ is
not the same or even similar to a man that follows the spiritual Law personiÞed in christ as the
Word (Law/Son) of God. But the Bible, as the supposed source of that ßattering title of ÒChristian,Ó
at the same time clearly and quite repetitively states that man should respect no persons or
ßattering titles such as the title of ÒChristian,Ó especially as one placed in use upon his own Self for
public show. This spells paradox. To be a member of any religion or church is to be given a Þctional
title and status/persona for temporary use, a privilege that can be taken away at any time by that
corporate entity. Thus, as strange as it may seem, a member-ship to any religion as a legal
institution and corporation is in fact to be in sin (syn) against the very foundation of NatureÕs Law,
the Law that holds all Þction in contempt. To put this into Þnality, the Bible says nothing about
being a ÒChristian.Ó It does, however, tell us to follow the Law of God through christ example.

So what is a legalized, state-sanctioned religion?

Let us clear the air so that no misunderstanding can possibly occur except by one's own choice to
pretend voluntary ignorance. For the legal law requires voluntary ignorance of God’s Law as a pre-
requisite. For ignorance does not require a lack of knowledge, only that such knowledge is willfully
not applied.

Title 1, Chapter 1, Section 1 of United States Code shows us how the common language we use and
are publicly accustomed to has been turned upside down and backwards when we ignorantly use
it in that legal jurisdiction. Remember that all titled (denominated) ÒreligionsÓ are legal
incorporations under the authority of the legal state and law, that a corporation is always a legally
(anti-God/antichrist) controlled ÒartiÞcial personÓ thereof, and that GodÕs Word (Law/Son)
respects no persons of any type without exception while commanding the same from us. Again we
Þnd a paradox. Also remember that the legal gods create their own terms of art, and so their own
deÞnitions are the actual legal, post-secondary etymology (re-source) of each word by their own re-
creation. This is to say that the meaning and intention of words in the Bible must necessarily be
destroyed and repurposed in the legal realm, so that the words in the Bible cannot exist as meant in
the legal realm. Words like Love and Charity are simply not viable terms in a system based on
money. We must separate in our minds what is art and what is its Source, respecting only the Real
and not the copy. And we must understand that the legal law cannot and does not allow these
artiÞcial persons (corporations) called legally as ÒreligionsÓ or their legally titled members to act
according to the intent of the words of the Bible (Law). Legal citizen-ships of the nation are literally
not allowed to follow the Word of God, and so neither are the men that stand in surety to those
public persons (legal statuses). There are no men of God in the United States, only persons birthed
of (created by) the United States. No man can attach himself to the devilÕs contract and law and






!92
also claim to be under God's Law. And so, as hard as this may be to hear, we must understand that
the ßattering title of ÒChristianÓ is a tool of the devil. It is a false name designed to cause men to act
opposite of the teachings of christ.

As this work is designed to correct this mistake of mis-taken id-entity and to help all men who seek
such knowledge to get back on the correct course in Nature under the correct Law, let us examine
the very entity, the nation, that steers and mentally drives us instead into a hopeless Þction and
collectively steals our birthright.

—=—

ÒIn determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwiseÑ

words importing the singular include and apply to several persons, parties, or things;

words importing the plural include the singular;

words importing the masculine gender include the feminine as well;

words used in the present tense include the future as well as the present;

the words ÒinsaneÓ and Òinsane personÓ shall include EVERY IDIOT, insane person,
AND PERSON NON COMPOS MENTIS;

the words ÒPERSONÓ and ÒWHOEVERÓ include CORPORATIONS, COMPANIES,

ASSOCIATIONS, FIRMS, PARTNERSHIPS, SOCIETIES, AND JOINT STOCK
COMPANIES, as well as INDIVIDUALS;

ÒofÞcerÓ includes any person AUTHORIZED BY LAW to perform the duties of the
ofÞce;

ÒsignatureÓ or ÒsubscriptionÓ includes A MARK when the PERSON making the same
INTENDED it as such;

ÒoathÓ INCLUDES AFFIRMATION, and ÒswornÓ includes afÞrmed;

ÒwritingÓ includes printing and typewriting and REPRODUCTIONS OF VISUAL

SYMBOLS by photographing, multigraphing, mimeographing, manifolding, or
otherwise.Ó

(U.S. Code › Title 1 › Chapter 1 › § 1 — July 30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 633; June 25, 1948, ch. 645, § 6, 62 Stat. 859; Oct. 31, 1951, ch. 655, § 1, 65
Stat. 710; Pub. L. 112–231, § 2(a), Dec. 28, 2012, 126 Stat. 1619.)

—=—

Imagine thatÉ the Þrst thing the United States tells its potential public citizen-ships (useful idiots)
is that their signature and subscription to its legal design in word-magic is as the mark of a beast, a
mark of intent, as our voluntary intention to be subjugated under the legal means of distress,
distraint, and districted seizure (realm of Caesar). Of course, only an idiot non compos mentis (not of
right mind) would allow himself and his children to be taken (delivered) under the rule of such a
system so opposed to God's Word of foundational Law. And as we will dissect and discuss, the
beast is each of us individually, our own worst enemy, not some multi-headed hydra created by
church and state to frighten us as children and as adults into pledging our faith to manÕs corp-
orations and our trust in money over GodÕs Nature of Reality. The Truth is so much stranger than
Þction, especially when we realize that our respected and honored truths have been completely
recreated from the Þctions (ratiÞed lies) of the imaginations of men.

!93
…and the scribes sought how they might take him by craft, and put him to death.

Here, at the beginning of this legal matrix that is created by US Code, we see no mention of man,
no Acts of God, but only the dead state of personhood as deÞned by the legally issued acts of
Congress, a house of lies where plurality equals singularity, male equals female, single equals
several, and today equals tomorrow. And the false gods said let there be persons, and there the art
of persons came into artful, legal existence. And the gods said it was good… for commerce. We see
here only the reference to artiÞcial persons, places, and things (nouns/names) of no substance, for
man's law is strictly the rules governing afÞrmed lies, legal Þctions, and artiÞce. Man is Truly the
god of nothingness.

We are all authorized by these gods and their law to commit licensed crimes against Nature and
thus against our fellow man (in legal persona). Usury is a prime example of this legal right of
persons (corporations), being banned in the Bible but absolutely adored by corporate religions,
some of which even have their own banks that loan at interest. And so we must ask, knowing what
we are authorized to do according to God’s Law of Nature, what does it mean in this United States
Code to be a ÒpersonÓ with the ßattering title of ÒofÞcerÓ and thus be Òauthorized by lawÓ to
perform duties? Who is the law? Where is the law? What god presides over this law? Or is the law
itself of the nature of a false god made of words?

Amazingly, it is much easier in such a sick society for most common people to justify their actions
according to this non-sense under a false temporary god called “the law” than to follow christ’s
example, often stating that this is “just the way it is” and while completely ignoring the self-evident
Permanence of God’s Creation, which Ultimately, Supremely, and without question is actually and
only “just the way It Really Is.” I say again, this is the science of legal law vs. the spiritual Nature
and Foundation of Law. It is an eternal battle commercially waged against the spiritual Nature of
man. Sadly, the adversary through its contracted dis-ease of Þction is certainly winning in these
modern times. And yet Jehovah is timeless, everlasting, and so I may take comfort that eventually
man will either heal or extinguish himself from GodÕs Nature. Reality (God) wins every time. It
would be the ultimate form of Natural selection, for it is our choice and election that will decide
our own fate. God (Creation) will be standing by and Existing in all of Its splendorous Beauty and
Glory that we call as Nature and the Universe and Reality for as long as we can survive ourselves
in our own shenanigans and tomfoolery, trying in vain to escape our place and Only Real Existence
in God’s Creation by pretending to exist instead in places (jurisdictions) of our own making. We
must stop acting like foolish, unlearned children playing make-believe with no Father and thus no
Law but that of our own imaginations.

In Þgurative terms, satan deals only in words, in contracts, in the selling of Þction and art as the
adversarial cure for the dis-ease that is Jehovah (the one True God of Existence) and the moral,
Natural Law that word denotes. The devilÕs contact is designed to trick all men into believing that
we may somehow bypass our duty to each other and to Nature (Creation) and still be a healthy,
Living part of that Oneness of Being. The legal system would die instantly if all men suddenly
followed the Highest Law, just as man as part of the Oneness of Nature and self-evidently bound
under Its Law is dying from his own pollution and pretended legal separation from his True
Nature (God).

—=—

“NOT WHAT IS SAID, BUT WHAT IS DONE, is regarded.”

—NON QUOD DICTUM EST, SED QUOD FACTUM EST INSPICITUR. Co.Litt. 36a. (Black4)

—=—

And so christ’s spiritual appeal in the following verses is perhaps the most damning exposure of
the fraud of all of manÕs religions built around the Bible and calling themselves as ÒChristianity.Ó

!94
For the title does not make the man, nor does the Bible make the false religion or its doctrines. In
the end, the simple message here is that by following only christ’s words and moral story in our
own path we are following only the Word (Son) of God as our highest Law. To worship christ is
ONLY to worship God (as Jehovah) and no other imposter of the craft.

IMPOST - noun - [Latin impositum, impono.] 1. Any tax or TRIBUTE IMPOSED BY

AUTHORITY… (Webs1828)

IMPOSTER - noun - 1. A PERSON who PRACTICES DECEPTION under an assumed

CHARACTER, IDENTITY, or NAME. (Random House Dictionary, 2016)

IMPOSTER - noun - 1. A PERSON who DECEIVES others, especially BY ASSUMING A

FALSE IDENTITY; charlatan. (Collins English Dictionary, 2012)

—=—

To be clear, christ and God are not necessarily separate concepts, but are also not one and the
same. If God were to be ludicrously limited to human form, christ would be the story of God. But
according to christ’s own words, we are not to worship Jesus christ as God, but to follow the christ
example while worshiping Jehovah (Truth/Nature/Reality). In other words, christ could vulgarly
be said to be the True and accepted art form or image of God, but not the full essence and sub-
stance. To be vulgar for the purposes of under-standing, if ants had a Bible, christ (the anointed)
would appear in Its allegory as the perfect example of the Life of a Pure and untainted ant under
the Laws of Nature. For trees, christ would be the story of the perfectly seeded, rooted, and fertilely
ßowering tree for all trees to follow by example. And the amoebaÕs anointed christos would
certainly undulate in Its own perfection of exempliÞed Being that all other like microorganisms
may follow as the perfection of such blobs. For men, christ is portrayed and anthropomorphized
for learning purposes in the image of a man (anointed by the “gladness” of Jehovah), so that man
may attain perfection of subjection to the Word (Law) of God, not so as to pretend himself as god.

By placing God-hood upon christ as all incorporated “Christian” religions of the world do, we are
allowing man to anoint (christen) himself as God’s replacement (antichrist/vicegerent) as Law-
maker upon earth. We are worshiping the art and persona (image/idol) of christ as an empty,
legally considered name and empty title over that of Jehovah. We are denying that man is always
only a helpless Creation of God, even as Jesus christ was the helplessly Created Son (Law/Word) of
God. Instead we allow certain “chosen” men to act as a false replacement (vicar) for God by acting
in the legal, ecclesiastical ofÞce and Òspiritual jurisdictionÓ of the ofÞce (vicar) of ÒChrist,Ó as an
empty, corporate, ßattering title in name only.

VICEGERENT - noun - [Latin vicem gereus, ACTING IN THE PLACE OF ANOTHER.] A

lieutenant; A VICAR; an ofÞcer who is deputed by a superior or by proper authority to
exercise the powers of another. KINGS ARE SOMETIMES CALLED GOD'S
VICEGERENTS. It is to be wished they would always deserve the appellation. - adjective -
Having or exercising DELEGATED POWER; ACTING BY SUBSTITUTION, OR IN THE
PLACE OF ANOTHER. (Webs1828)

—=—

Consider that a king or any other false god is hoped to rule as the perfection of Jehovah might be
imagined to rule over men. However, power corrupts absolutely, and god-like power is the
ultimate corruptor of men, especially when such corruptions of power are written into the legal law
of the kingdom that would, without its licenses and immunities, otherwise bind over that king as
his own spiritual, Natural (unwritten) Law. And so this wet dream of a God-like king or pope of
men, as the pure and moral aristocratic Þgurehead, is at best a work of art that may never see Life.
Every vicegerent, every pope, king, president, and other replacements of christ and God are only
ever a simulacrum, a copy without an original, as a hopeless non sequitur.

!95
 NON SEQUITUR - Latin. “It does not follow.” (Black4)

NON SEQUITUR - noun - 1. An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the
premises or evidence. 2. A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it.
(American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition, 2016)

INCONGRUOUS - adjective - [Latin incongruus.] Not congruous; unsuitable; not Þtting;

inconsistent; improper. The dress of a seaman on a judge, would be deemed incongruous with
his character and station. (Webs1828)

INCONGRUITY - noun - [in and congruity.] 1. Want of congruity; IMPROPRIETY;

inconsistency; absurdity; unsuitableness of one thing to another. The levity of youth in a
grave divine, is deemed an incongruity between manners and profession. 2.
DISAGREEMENT OF PARTS; want of symmetry. (Webs1828)

—=—

From the perspective of a Living, Breathing man, anything that man might say about his True Self
that refers to his Þctional strawman persona is of course incongruous to his True Nature. To make
the declaration, for instance, that I am a legal person named Clint Richardson is in fact an
oxymoron, purely rhetorical (of words), and is an impossibility in Nature (Reality). No man is a
legal entity in Reality. It is a forced belief, for all things legal are a lie. And so the incongruity of
man (Reality) and person (Þction) is defeated by law. The form, as the imaginary creation of
rhetorical art, is made magically equal to, subject, and thus congruous to what is an object of
Reality, where the Source becomes tricked into following the lower law of Its empty self-image.

Man, being under the Natural Law a congruous part of GodÕs Nature and Design becomes a non
sequitur (non-follower) of God (Source) when he pretends to be that which he is not, when he
believes in (loves) art over Reality. Thus no man may become a Þctional king, a pope, or any other
magistrate god and also congruently (at the same time) remain bound by the Laws of Nature,
especially when the purpose of such a legal (anti-Nature) ofÞce and ßattering title and authority is
to regulate money and commerce, the root of all evil. Under God's Nature, no matter what the title
offered, man must remain as Pure in his Being as christ did, accepting no ßatteries or ofÞces, no
ranks or classes, and certainly no Þctional crown of kingship. Any scriptural mention of the word
king as applied to christ was of course either a mockery, as the insulting Òking of the Jews,Ó or as a
reference to that Higher Kingdom of God (Jehovah). All who follow christ will be king of kings and
lord of lords as he parabolically was, for the follower of the Law of God, the Highest Law, defeats
any other form of law and authority presented by men in false title. For Jehovah is salvation. Only
the Reality of Existence may save us from our own lies and designs against It. The reborn man
fears, obeys, and commands only God's Law, never that of a self-proclaimed king or pope. This is
because a man of God is never to be feared by any king, for his Life is Lived Purely and without
interference or subjection to such trißing legal matters and jurisdictions of those pretended realms
and kingdoms that seek to subvert God's Nature and Law. And so the negative duty of the Highest
Law applies to both entities, each having the negative duty to leave the other alone without
trespass. For while the man (Creation) of God has no legal capacity, the king only has authority
over its own subjects and artful creations.

—=—

“The king cannot load a subject with imposition against his consent.”
—NON POTEST REX SUBDITUM RENITENTEM ONERARE IMPOSITIONIBUS. 2 Inst. 61. (Black4)

—=—

!96
 —=—

“A command can express no more than an ought or a shall, because it is

a universal, BUT IT DOES NOT EXPRESS AN ‘IS’; and this at once
makes plain its deÞciency. AGAINST SUCH COMMANDS JESUS
SETS VIRTUE, i.e., A LOVING DISPOSITION, WHICH MAKES THE
CONTENT OF THE COMMAND SUPERFLUOUS AND DESTROYS
ITS FORM AS A COMMAND, because that form implies an
OPPOSITION between a commander and something resisting the
command.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Der Geist des Christentums und sein Schicksal [The Spirit of Christianity and its Fate] (1799)

—=—

Just as the Lieutenant Governor of each state and the Vice-President of the nation acts by the
authority of or in the place of the main ofÞcer of his namesake, so too do the pope and kings of
empires pretend to act in the place of christ, just as christ was sent to spread the Word of God. This
vicarious, ßattering title is of course directly opposed to the scriptural teachings, and causes men to
worship the falsely presented replacement of christ as an ofÞcer of the church and state rather than
the Reality of christ which is not a man but the story of the Word (Law) of God that all men should
follow without respect of such false pretenders in mammon.

In order for these popes and kings and the sovereignties of principalities to rule in GodÕs stead
(anti-, instead of, and vicariously in place of God) by their own false doctrines of law and cannons
of ecclesia, man must Þrst be indoctrinated by their false words into believing (loving) the
misunderstanding that christ was in fact God, despite the well-known and inescapable Biblical
tales of christ as He proclaims over and over His own helplessness before and under the Laws of
ÒGodÓ (Jehovah). The christ character continuously instructs his followers to worship God by
following his (christÕs) example in his actions and words, but never does christ claim to be GodÕs
temporal and secular replacement or legal king on earth as the current priest-class and pope does.
The harsh Truth is that He does not ever state that any man should Òbecome a Christian.Ó Christ
did not lead his ßock towards Caesars pagan legal empire of falsely, ßatteringly titled ÒChristiansÓ
but always away from it. For the christÕs example is the spiritual solution to and separation from
such legal authority of name and title. This is foundation of Law!

—=—

ÒHo, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no
money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk WITHOUT
MONEY AND WITHOUT PRICE.”
—Isaiah 55:1, KJB

—=—

If you canÕt imagine Living in Pure Truth, Love, and Charity, without the use of legal names and
titles, numbers and marks, money and credit, or licenses and permits, then you are a victim of these
charlatans, Pharisees, and scribes of the priest-class of CaesarÕs legal realm. Your mind has been
properly districted (seized, distressed, and distrained). And who among us has not been made the
fool by these legalistic, nonsensical temptations? Which of these legal laws and licenses and
permits created by legal gods and land-lords states simply to follow christÕs example and no other

!97
and to have no other God before Jehovah? Why none of them, of course, for they are opposed to
christ and to God’s Law. They are legally licensed corporations under the secular law of the
antichrist state! They are mere pretenders.

In fact, when we examine the intent of this hardly used word ÒChristianÓ in the Bible, we Þnd in
Strong's #G5546 (Christianos) that this was a title created by the secular society of gentiles as a name
to call those who speciÞcally were outlaws, as the Òfollowers of christ.Ó Jesus Christ neither created
nor promoted this word, nor was it even uttered from his mouth. These “Christians” were not
members of any religion, merely followers of the Highest Law of God by christ example and no
other, and were persecuted as such. It was only later, according to Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, that the
title of Christianos was accepted by those True Believers (Lovers) of God's Word (Son) as a sort of
name or badge of honor, for there was nothing to deny as True followers by this word of art. The
absolutely unmistakable difference between those followers of old and the corporate “Christians”
of today is that those of old followed christ to escape from civil society, from the nations of Caesar
and from man’s twisting laws against Nature, while those of today embrace it for public show and
justiÞcation of their place in the very legal society that is opposed to God's Word (Son). For their
religions have misled them, carrying them away from the Truth of what a follower of the Son
(Word/Law) Really is.

We have all been made into imposters, our Natural duties to each other turned into contractual
debts as legal obligations to harm one another, while our ability to charitably interact has been
utterly destroyed by the Þctional characters we have assumed under non-proÞt corporations and
municipalities. If we are acting in a Þctional persona then our highest law is only the vulgar law of
Þction. We pretend we are some thing, some person we are not, having to prove our false id-entity of
artful self in third person everywhere we wish to use (employ) its beneÞts or pay its debts. We live
falsely under a false id-entity (the personiÞcation of id as a legal entity) and so egotistically deceive
even ourselves with this borrowed identity (person/legal status) in our own created debtor’s hell.
But we didn’t create it. We are merely cursed to live our lives in its sacredly worshiped (cursed)
artiÞce. The creator controls his own creation, a maxim of law, and so we must look to the gods of
this Þctional nation to know the purpose and intent of our Þctionally contracted dis-ease within
their hellish legal creation. At the end of every avenue of exploration and discovery, we Þnd that
the gods of this legal realm follow only one master, the god of mammon (valuation in money). For
the realms and laws of the nations are purely commercial in their artiÞcial nature, revolving strictly
around their own created currency. Without money, there would be no crimes against what is
valued in money. Without money, there would be only Charity and Good Will, and crime would be
without value or purpose to anyone. Remember, as will be explained further, all legal crimes are
Þnancial in nature. There is no crime that is not valued in money, for all legal crimes are against
false values (property). To understand the legal system, we must understand the evil that is
valuation in mammon to which all legal law applies. To believe in one's own valuation in money
for employment purposes is to be impressed or marked by satan (that which is adversarial to
Nature). For such a mark or impression of the mind is the property of he who makes such an
impression, until the brainwashed man may overcome such false knowledge.

—=—

“Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit
who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?
FOR YOU WERE BOUGHT AT A PRICE; THEREFORE GLORIFY GOD
IN YOUR BODY AND IN YOUR SPIRIT, WHICH ARE GOD’S.”
—1 Corinthians 6: 19-20, KJB

—=—

!98
Remember that the scriptures state that you and that every man is “bought at a price.” Therefore
value your body not in any persona in mammon that is opposed to God, but value all things in the
Reality of Nature, including yourself, as priceless and incorruptible from such artiÞcial
destructions. Let no amount of Þctional money purchase (conquer) your soul. And remember that
when you do allow this to happen, as we all legally have since birth, your “body” is instead a
person (vessel) of the state, meaning that your god is the state (the purchaser). We have all sold
ourselves into legal bondage, accepting the artiÞcial, non-Existing value of money in exchange for
what is Truly priceless in Nature. This is the notion of christ dying on the cross, the ultimate price
paid in spiritual redemption.

VALUE - noun - valÕu. [Latin valor, from valeo, to be worth.] 1. Worth; that PROPERTY or
those properties of a thing WHICH RENDER IT USEFUL OR ESTIMABLE; or the degree of
that property or of such properties. THE REAL VALUE OF A THING IS ITS UTILITY, ITS
POWER OR CAPACITY OF PROCURING OR PRODUCING GOOD. Hence the real or
intrinsic value of iron, is far greater than that of gold. But there is, in many things, an
estimated value depending on OPINION OR FASHION, such as the value of precious
stones. The value of land depends on its fertility, or on its vicinity to a market, or on both. 2.
Price; the rate of worth set upon a commodity, or the amount for which a thing is sold. We
say, the value of a thing is what it will bring in market. 3. WORTH; APPLIED TO PERSONS.
Ye are all physicians of no value. Job 13:4. Ye are of more value than many sparrows. Matthew
10:31. 4. High rate. Caesar is well acquainted with your virtue, and therefore SETS THIS
VALUE ON YOUR LIFE. 5. Importance; efÞcacy in producing effects; as considerations of no
value. Before events shall have decided on the value of the measures. 6. Import; precise
signiÞcation; as THE VALUE OF A WORD OR PHRASE. - verb transitive - valÕu. 1. To
estimate the worth of; to rate at a certain price; to apprise; as, to value lands or goods. 2. To
rate at a high price; to have in high esteem; as a valued poem or picture. A man is apt to value
his own performances at too high a rate; he is even disposed to value himself for his humility.
3. To esteem; to hold in respect and estimation; as, to value one for his works or virtues. 4.
To take account of. The mind doth value every moment. 5. To reckon or estimate with respect
to number or power. The queen is valu'd thirty thousand strong. 6. To consider with respect
to importance. The king must take it ill, so slightly valu'd in his messenger. Neither of them
valued their premises according to the rules of honor or integrity. 7. To raise to estimation.
SOME VALUE THEMSELVES TO THEIR COUNTRY BY JEALOUSIES TO THE CROWN.
[Not in use.] 8. To be worth. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

—=—

To put it simply, a man of God as a follower of christ is all but worthless to the legal realm and
commerce of the state, which means inversely that he is priceless to God. He has no legal capacity,
which means he has no taxable or chargeable value. A man that will not sell his soul in contract
with the devils of the legal realm has absolutely no deÞnable value in the nations of men. For he
may never be persuaded to follow or be controlled (governed) by that false god of mammon, will
never chase after or respect its money, and hates (respects not) all false valuations thereof. Simply
put, the man of God has no need of contracts for his Life revolves around pure Charity, and so the
devil is powerless against such a spiritually driven man.

To follow christÕs teachings is ONLY to follow GodÕs Law. For to worship christ alone over that of
God is to worship Creation over the Creator, for christ is naught but the anthropomorphized
version of God incarnate. Even Jesus states that what Jesus says is ONLY what God told him to say.
And so even the christos (deÞned as anointed by God) expresses His will that we are not to follow
christ as a God, but as GodÕs will for man in christÕs exempliÞed works and actions. To worship
God without christ (without example) is as foolishness and blindness. To worship christ without
God (without Source) is insane (non compos mentis).

And yet this is exactly how the church retains power over men, not by claiming to be God directly,
but by claiming to be the director of the legal ofÞce of a false Christ incorporated.

!99
No gods (lords) before me… the LORD of lords.

Let us read just one of many corporate church and legal religion-damning, in-your-face sections
from the scriptures, as the Word (Law/Son) of God speaks:

—=—

“Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but
because of the Pharisees THEY DID NOT CONFESS HIM, lest they
should be put out of the synagogue: FOR THEY LOVED THE PRAISE
OF MEN MORE THAN THE PRAISE OF GOD… Jesus cried and said,
He that believeth on me, BELIEVETH NOT ON ME, BUT ON HIM
THAT SENT ME. AND HE THAT SEETH ME SEETH HIM THAT SENT
ME. I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me
should not abide in darkness. And if any man hear my words, and
believe not, I JUDGE HIM NOT: FOR I CAME NOT TO JUDGE THE
WORLD, BUT TO SAVE THE WORLD. He that rejecteth me, and
receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: THE WORD THAT
I HAVE SPOKEN, THE SAME SHALL JUDGE HIM in the last day. FOR
I HAVE NOT SPOKEN OF MYSELF; BUT THE FATHER WHICH SENT
ME, HE GAVE ME A COMMANDMENT, what I should say, and what I
should speak. And I know that HIS COMMANDMENT IS LIFE
EVERLASTING: whatsoever I speak therefore, EVEN AS THE FATHER
SAID UNTO ME, SO I SPEAK.”
—John 12: 42-50, KJB

—=—

The Word, as the Law either followed or not followed in harmony, shall judge each man according
to his respect of Its authority and his fear of It. Here christ tells us that it is only each of us
individually that will suffer judgement, and that judgement is a direct symptom of straying from
the Word (Law) of God. We may only save ourselves by following the Son (Word of God), for to
follow the story of christ is to follow the Law (Word) of God's Nature. Does this sound like christ is
telling you to worship the character of christ by His name, as a historical Þgure, just as one might
worship any other god in the Roman or Greek timeline? Not at all and in no way may we pretend
to translate this as such! We are to believe in (love) God, as “He that sent” christ, which is the Son
(Law/Word) of Jehovah. I cannot stress the importance of how the church has tricked us into either
loving or hating the person and character of christ by representing the meaning of the word “Son”
as “Father” (God). The Word is given by God, thus the Word (Law/Son) is not God. The Son calls
God his Father, and so too should we, lest the state interlopes and forces itself to be our surrogate
father.

Remember, the words “Jesus christ” in the Bible translate to nothing more or less than “Jehovah is
salvation.” But how can Nature (Jehovah) be our salvation unless we utterly respect It and obey Its
self-evident Law?



!100
At no time does Jesus christ claim to be the God of judgement, only a teacher and savior before the
time of judgement. Believeth not on me, but on He who sent me. I speak not my own words, but the Word
of God. I’m not a judge, but a savior, and the only One Real Judge is God which we all will face. Indeed, we
turn away from Nature, from our very own Source, every day of our Existence as we pretend
someone else will defend It. Hell, aliens from outer space are the latest meme of the false saviors of
the earth, while many are foolishly led by quasi-science theorists to question if the universe is
actually a hologram? The powers that be will do anything to cause us to cease in our belief (love)
even in the self-Existence of our own Selves, and have seemingly all but succeeded through their
technologies (art forms) and entertainments to make us stop believing in Reality, in Existence, and
therefore to stop following the Law of True Existence.

The inadvertently trapped ßy, for instance, does not pause in its struggle to escape from a spiderÕs
web in order to contemplate the nature of that web or of its current political predicament. The ßy
does not pause to reßect that ÒI donÕt believe in God because God wouldnÕt create such monstrous
spiders that cast such entrapping webs only to catch ßies like me for their dinner and sustenance,Ó
as man so complains when he traps himself in his own artful designs and legal pitfalls against
Jehovah. But we must understand that even the spiderÕs web is part of the design of God, a
blueprint of the Laws of Nature imprinted upon every species of spider, which spins such fantastic
intricacies out of its butt Naturally and without imagination or instruction manual, and without the
fruit of good or evil intention. For these concepts of the fruit tree exist only in the imaginations of
men. The spider does what it does not because it is evil, but because this is its self-Existent and
undeniable purpose; not because it saw the latest trends and interior web decorating suggestions
on the Arachnid Home Building Network. Yet man will do anything to blame anyone and anything
but himself for his own follies and mistakes, all of which are a direct result of breaking with the
Law of Nature and not following the Son (Law/Word) of God. And so this empty word ÒGodÓ is
the ultimate scape-goat, the Holy Ghost in every machine of artiÞce built by men in disharmony
with GodÕs True Nature. But conscious responsibility of Self, of one's own actions in all cases, is of
course the Highest Law. It is equal only to that same reciprocal duty towards all other men and to
all of GodÕs Creation of Nature without excuse. And this perfection of the Law and its humble
implementation spells heaven on Earth for all.

But we must learn that Law not in the writings and musings of men, but as the spider and the ßy
knows the Laws of Nature, by acting only as spiders and ßies are Designed to act, without artful
persons, ßattering titles, and false laws and excuses. We must be instinctual, doing only what
spiritually feels as the self-evidently right course of action, and when this road is blocked or
questioned, seeking answers only under the Law of Nature. For the Truth Is that we are no thing
we claim by words to be. We are only what we are, where we are, why we are, who we are, and when
we are, and at all times the answers to these questions is as God made us and as no other person,
place, or thing. We are in no time and carry no value. We are part of GodÕs inÞnite and never-ending
Creation and no other, and we are thus slaves to no other. While this type of religious sounding
language may be a turn-off to the many publicly educated fools such as my formerly manipulated
self out there, you will Þnd that this feeling is purely built upon logical fallacy and from the
indoctrination of church and state, from so many designs against your own right-mindedness.

Consider this: all of the above concepts are steeped in ambiguity. Ambiguity is never the property
of any man or of any of man's legalistic creations or Þctional authorities. If you seek proof of these
claims, you must Live them. They are not available for test drive or vacation rental while you take a
break from the legal gods. Ambiguity, if you will, is the property of God, and so only men of God
may beneÞt by such anonymity of name. So what am I? I am of God. Who am I? I am of God. Where
am I? I am of God. What year do you Live in? I am of God (timeless)! What country do you live in?
I am of God (the Highest Nature of Creation and Law)! How much money may I employ (use) you
for? I am of God (priceless)! What is your name? I am of God (without need of legal name or title).
What ÒreligionÓ are you? I am of God, etcÉ ad inÞnity.

!101
There is no question that cannot be answered by this Purely spiritual and indefatigable, in-
defeasible response, and therefore there are no words that can defeat the Purely spiritual and
Lawful man of God.

The only Real and challenging questions are: can you overcome your own ego? Can you defeat
your own fear of artiÞcial things not of God? For fear of God alone is the only wisdom, as God is
the only Truth. To fear the Truth is to respect It utterly and never deviate from Its Nature and Law.
To fear Þction is to fear and respect the gods of nothingness. To fear Nature is to respect and tread
lightly and carefully upon It while obeying outright every aspect of Its Law. For fear in anything, as
love, is most importantly a sign of belief in that thing.

The main problem is ÒreligionÓ (noun) itself, for in organized religions (artiÞcial persons) we are
guided more by our outwardly presented reputation and public show than we are by the Law of
Nature straight out of the Bible. Remember, following and thus becoming the Son (Law) of God is
not a religion, it is a Lifestyle. It must become a no-brainer, untainted by unnatural desires and
legal inducements to the devil’s contract and law. Unfortunately, to be a follower of christ generally
means that you wonÕt ÒÞt inÓ to most organized things by necessity or by rule, which is a good
thing. And if you are reading this work, chances are you already don't really Þt in to this sick and
twisted society you may be pretending to, and are looking for the courage and reason to stand
apart from it instead of continuing to play the charade of being a well-adjusted person of it. You are
looking for the exit, which turns out to be the Law (Word). For there is no actual exit from a
Þctional lie. Truth (Reality) is the only exit, and It is always there to catch you, for Þction is only a
delusional dis-ease of the mind pretending to cover up the Truth.

What is God’s judgement if not merely the consequences of our own actions against the Natural
Order and Law of Nature that we call as Jehovah (God)? We seem to blame the empty word
(name/title) of “God” for all of our problems that we not only create for ourselves but also respect,
for we are appealing to some Þctional authority of the false legal gods and their law of artiÞce
rather than to what Is Jehovah (Truth). We are not asking what this word “God” means, and are
instead using the noun (empty name with no substance) of “God” as a scapegoat. We refuse to
blame ourselves for our own creations and voluntary participations in mammon, and blame an
unknown “God” as if we followed Its rulebook (Bible) and got no results. We are acting as the
worst kind of hypocrites to say the very least.

And yet this notion of Being a Savior is not to be taken literally, but only in the manner that every
man may Save himself through the comprehension, abeyance, and thus Love of the Word (Law/
Son) of God. In other words, man may choose to follow God’s Word (Law) by that example of the
Son or he may fall into legal Þction and act legally (artiÞcially/satanically) under the magistrate
gods of men and their legalistic corporate religions, choosing art over the Reality it re-presents;
God or mammon. We are not to worship the empty name of “christ” which can be bestowed as an
appointment upon any man, but as the spirit of how every individual man should Live under
God’s Law, by christ example not the popes (antichrist).

There is no Word or invitation from christ or Jehovah that we should come and be “Protestant” or
“Methodist” or “Catholic” as our legally declared religion. The Bible is an instruction manual, not a
corporation. Christ deals only in actions not words, constantly warning of the dangers of word
magic and of person-hood and ßattering titles, which only exist in the Þctional legal realm and only
with respect of Þctional persons, places, and things (nouns). There is, in Nature, under God, no such
thing as a ÒChristian,Ó for GodÕs judgement will not be on some nickname or ßattering title, but the
result of our own actions in Real Life according to christÕs example, the personiÞed story of Law.
We will certainly expound on these notions in a big way as we move forward. But the author hopes
that this discourse is taken in the spirit it is intended, in the spirit of one desperately trying to
follow christ’s actual teachings and adhere to God’s actual Word of Law and share it, as one who
wishes to become as the example.

!102
I suppose the most simplistic way to look at this is to pretend that God gave each of us a spiritual
coupon. We may either choose to redeem it through “christ the Redeemer,” or we may wad it up in
the backs of our minds and pretend it doesn’t Exist. But the coupon is merely the keys of know-
ledge, and the redemption process can only be achieved by emulating the character of christ. We
either display the Natural character and attributes of Jesus christ in the Pure Truth of God’s Nature
and Law, or we carry our Þctional character in legal persona while submitting to the legal creators
and magistrates (gods of Þction) against Nature, against Truth, and thus against Reality.

It is and has always been a choice, and always will be.

Comparatively, and as will be covered later, we can see here what might loosely be compared to the
law of agency, the heart and soul of the civil contractual relationship. Could we say that Jesus christ
was the agent (employee/servant) of his principal (God), spreading the wisdom of Its spiritual Law
(Faith) around to all of the third parties he came into contact with? Crudely, we could. Like a
vacuum salesman pumping the wares of his employing company, christ was charitably giving and
teaching the Natural Law on behalf of his Master while voluntarily operating as Its servant.

I only mention this because the whole system of mammon is built upon this same notion of both
commercial, legal redemption and upon the law of agency, as what is called “volunteerism,” which
again is merely a legal term of art that actually refers to the doctrine of master and servant. To be
redeemed monetarily (in mammon) within any legal court is of course a false redemption, one
without christ or God present in any substance of the word. In short, we must all ask just who our
principal (god) is, who we are working for, whoÕs Law we are obeying, whose Word (Law) we are
spreading and teaching to our children, and thus who our Master really is. For we may only have
one master, one Law, as the scriptures exclaim. While a full breakdown of these terms of art will be
provided herein, the reader should keep these above verses in the back of your mind at all times.
Remember, what christ says or does is only as an agent of his principal Governor, of Source, under
the Law of his Creator, his God, his Father. So too should it be with all men. And so we could say
that the Natural jurisdiction of God is Purely that which is not the artiÞcial, legal jurisdiction re-
created by man, nor is it what we worship legally (artiÞcially) as the corporate Òfounding fathers” of
this legal, commercial system under a nation of institutionalized slavery in mammon. We could say
that christÕs path wound ever so carefully and narrowly between these artiÞcial, legal, Þctional
jurisdictions, always remaining within GodÕs Word and Design and always without legal Þction
and names (nouns) from the false fathers of art and language (gods of the nations). In other words,
christ never abandoned his own Nature; never removing his True “Self” from the Reality of God’s
Kingdom we call as Nature and Its Law. And He never spoke on or in their artful terms of legal
entrapment.

In the i-magi-nations, jurisdiction is only applied to legal, artiÞcially created persons, places, and
things. In other words, Jurisdiction only applies to nouns (legal names and titles), not to the actual
Natural substance of Reality Itself; not to what Lives and Exists solely in God’s Realm and under
GodÕs Law. Legal law applies only to that which is anti- (in the stead of) what is Real, to what is
impermanent, to the artiÞcial creations (words) of man subject therefore to manÕs artiÞcial law
(words). All Þctions are only ever made of words, masterfully crafted into magic spellings that
respect form and appearance over the Reality of God’s Design and True Substance. And so when
any legalistic jurisdiction is said to apply to any man, which paradoxically it cannot since man is
not a legal creation, it is only because that man is acting voluntarily in an agency (employment/
trust) relationship within some legal Þction (the jurisdiction controlling any legally created and
named thing). This is because that man is using and traveling on some property, vessel, and vehicle
conveyance not his own (within an artiÞcial, legally created territory and jurisdiction as a Þctional
place), and is thus appearing as something he is not (a legal name, number, and status called a
person). He is assuming the name of a strawman, an artiÞcially created legal subject (person)
created by some god (thing) and its imaginarily created government [place] that is controlled by its
own invented law. Fiction is never of Source, only a re-source for re-purposing. In short, this is the
abandonment of God and Nature. It is called citizen-ship or member-ship. It signiÞes and 




!103
empowers the Þctional god of mammon, which is master over all monetary considerations and of
things valued in the minds of men by money, including the persons and labor of other men. For
such human capital, mammon is the only master and manager.

—=—

“The term ‘SPELL’ is generally used for magical procedures which cause
harm, or force people to do something against their will -- unlike
charms for healing, PROTECTION, etc.
—Oxford Dictionary of English Folklore

—=—

The word charm, in the Bible, has the meaning of favour (favor), grace, or acceptance, as a Þctional
elevation in man's mind that he is some Þctional thing he is not. The spell of person-hood, citizen-
ship, and subsequent ßattering titles in such a legalistic class system of nations is certainly a
deceitful charm that causes men to act against their own will or moral conscious. And of course
protection is the inducement to contract offered by any organized criminal organization, be it
governmental or the mob. Of course the only protection actually granted is from the false authority
of the same outÞt offering such protections, to protect you from itself for a tribute (tax/fee).

Most often we seek the wrong answer from those overlords we call legally (artiÞcially) as ad-
ministrative judges (gods) of the legal Þction of all nations. They are nothing but the agents of
mammon, ensuring a constant extortion and exaction of non-existent but believed-in (loved)
monetary wealth from the proprietary legal personÕs of men, for they represent themselves as the
agents (revenue/tribute collectors) of the creator gods of all menÕs legal persons (status). They
cause us to fear the wrong god, the god of mammon, which means that we fear the consequences of
Living a Truly spiritual Life of True Love, Peace, and Charity without valuing such acts in money.
Strangely enough, it is the fact that we ask questions that makes us subject to any answer (opinion/
decision) offered by that administrative god, for the answer to any legal question is only ever the
declaratory judgement and establishing opinion of a legal god, and the gods of the courts only hear
questions from Þctional persons represented by agents of their legal, principal creator. When we
pray for our answers to what Law Is while appearing before the Þctional court in a Þctional form
(status) in front of the men in legal persona and title who magisterially administrate such a Þctional
realm of legalism, we will be destined to never receive that which is Truth (God), for Þction is
always a lie. We are simply praying (pleading) to the wrong god (creator). Part of our problem is
that our questions are asked in persona, in the Þctional status of one (proprietarily) subject to the
law that binds us to the answer given to us in surety. We must obey that godÕs Þnal, legally
contracted and dis-eased word, as the forced answer to our false prayers (legal pleas). For what we
receive is not so much an answer as it is a militarily enforced curse. A Real man need never ask
questions from an artiÞcially entitled one, unless his desire is to subvert the power, protection, and
duty of and to his True Creator and to add the vice (legal ad-vice) that accompanies that sin of
artiÞciality under a person-hood. For what is more of a sin (crime) against the Nature of all GodÕs
Creation (Reality) than to pretend It doesnÕt Exist by acting and imaginarily operating outside of Its
Supreme Law in an artiÞcial persona (mask of legal status) and pretended licensure designed
speciÞcally to subvert that Highest Law? We seek, pray (plead), and receive (are legally granted)
only the Þctional, artiÞcial proof of legal jurisdiction as opposed to what we should be doing,
which is to question and demand the spiritual, equitable (Natural Law) jurisdiction of any artiÞcial,
positively declared proofs and laws of that Þctional legal realm and its false gods against True
Source and Law. And of course we receive exactly what we ask for in our legal appearance, which
is never the Truth of the Reality of Nature or of GodÕs Natural Law. We acquire only the god we
seek and respect.

!104
As will be explained, proof is also only ever a Þction of law, for that which Exists in Nature, in
Reality, including your True Self and all other Life on GodÕs Earth, need not prove Itself but by Its
very own, unspoken, unwritten, and un-simulated self-evidence of ambiguous Existence. This is
also a foundational principle (maxim) of law, that only positive (man-made) declarations must be
accompanied by proof of claim. And so any proof offered against a man in a legal court can only
ever be offered against the legal person (legal status) under which he is voluntarily, Þctionally
standing before that judge (god) of legal, Þctional things. In other words, we trap ourselves within
legal jurisdictions because we ask for proof that we are in that jurisdiction instead of denying to the
court its privilege of using any Þctional proof that we (as men of God) are subject to any Þctional
jurisdiction or false persona. We do as we are told by them instead of telling them what they should
do. It is only because we appear as if we are the legal creation (strawman person) of that legal god
(Þctional thing) that we are subject to the legal law (artiÞcial place, as a jurisdiction) of that legal
god. For the law of the gods may only be applied to the legal creations (property) of those gods,
and man is only ever a Creation (Property) of That God which Created all of Nature and the
Universe as One continuous and eternal Whole. Only abandonment of this always recognized
Supreme and Permanent Creator God of Nature can cause man to fall into that Þctional state of
artiÞcial, legal life; the spiritually dead engagement of a Þctional persona created by those who call
themselves gods but are not. Of course, we would not be standing before the court in the Þrst place
if we (while acting in its legal persona) were not subject to its jurisdiction, and we only stand
therein if we agree and admit to being enjoined by its Þctional persona and legal title. Just showing
up and identifying ourselves in US citizenship by displaying a driverÕs license or other legal source
is positively expressed proof and consent of false authoritative jurisdiction, for the identiÞcation
proves the admixture of Þction to our good name and denies our True and Pure Source in GodÕs
Nature. It also presents our insane (non compos mentis) state of mind, as our wholehearted belief in
the Þctional re-presentation in persona we are pretending to be. What could be more insane? By
legally appearing in person within any court and thus acknowledging its robed attorney (agent) as
authority and judge (god), we have submitted to the fact that that entitled devil is our god (judge),
and so any words stated to him are only a prayer to our temporary god, falling deaf upon GodÕs
Þgurative ears and considered only without GodÕs Higher Law of the Permanence of Nature. It is
only a petition to that man temporarily pretending to play in the ofÞce of god over us through our
own voluntarily accepted Þctional re-presentation of ourselves in legal persona (proprietary status)
that is an expressed (consenting) acknowledgement and conÞrmation of its (his) false jurisdiction.

In a way, this sounds more like a science Þction story than religion. And you know what? That is a
true statement. For this is the science of legalism and the legalism of false science. We are currently
under what Huxley labeled as a scientiÞc dictatorship. These are the incremental growing pains of
a Technocracy. In essence, the Þgurative, digital tower of Babel is rising once again, for we may
now all speak the same language through computer code in a virtual reality. The code is recreating
the world through virtual, artiÞcial means, and we are all spiritually dying to get physically and
mentally plugged in.

And so, in all seriousness, we must now pray to our false legal god. For it is the agent of the creator
(principal) of the Þctional persona we have just legally (artiÞcially) appeared in. We are slave
(servant) to it and the law (master) that binds it. We have entered the sacred (cursed) temple of
those who rule and bar our spiritual journey by legal word magic, bearing the mark and Arms (seal
and ßag) of its sacred (cursed) nation in interstate and international commerce.

PRAY - verb intransitive - [Latin precor; proco; this word belongs to the same family as
PREACH and REPROACH; Hebrew, to bless, TO REPROACH; rendered in Job 2:9, TO
CURSE; properly, to reproach, to rail at or upbraid. In Latin the word precor signiÞes TO
SUPPLICATE GOOD OR EVIL, and precis signiÞes A PRAYER AND A CURSE. See
Imprecate.] 1. TO ASK with earnestness or zeal, as FOR A FAVOR, OR FOR SOMETHING
DESIRABLE; to entreat; to supplicate. Pray for them WHO DESPITEFULLY USE YOU AND
PERSECUTE YOU. Matthew 5:44. 2. TO PETITION; TO ASK, AS FOR A FAVOR; AS IN
APPLICATION TO A LEGISLATIVE BODY. 3. In worship, to address the Supreme Being
with solemnity and reverence, with adoration, confession of sins, supplication for mercy, and

!105
 thanksgiving for blessings received. When thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou
hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father who is in secret, and thy Father who seeth in secret,
shall reward thee openly. Matthew 6:5. 4. I pray that is, I pray you tell me, or let me know, is a
common mode of introducing a question. - verb transitive - To supplicate; to entreat; to urge.
We pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 2 Corinthians 5:20. 1. In worship, to
supplicate; to implore; to ask with reverence and humility. Repent therefore of this thy
wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thy heart may be forgiven thee. Acts 8:22.
2. TO PETITION. THE PLAINTIFF PRAYS JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. He that will have
the BENEFIT of this act, MUST PRAY a prohibition before a sentence in the ecclesiastical
court. 3. TO ASK OR INTREAT IN CEREMONY OR FORM. Pray my colleague Antonius I
may speak with him. [In most instances, this verb is transitive only by ellipsis. To pray God, is
used for to pray to God; to pray a prohibition, is to pray for a prohibition, etc.] TO PRAY IN
AID, IN LAW, is to call in for help ONE WHO HAS INTEREST IN THE CAUSE. (Webs1828)

—=—

The problem is that The God of Nature has no interest in legal causes.

Generally, to pray or consider as holy (of Jehovah) anything that is a creation of man, as in that
which is artiÞcial or symbolic of anything Real and self-evident in Nature, is to cause the opposite
effect of the intent of prayer. In other words, a vain prayer is a curse. To pray for money, as an
example, is to pray to God for that which is opposed to God, and so this is a cursed prayer. To pray
for what is unnatural to the God of Nature is ludicrous. Only the gods of Þction, the creators of the
Þction of money (mammon) can be called upon by such a public-minded and vulgarly unspiritual
and unnatural prayer, for the prayer can only lead the man in his own actions and false hope
towards the administrator (magistrate god) of that debtor’s hell he publicly prays to. Thus the
things that are considered as sacred by men in their artful religious affairs are only the cursed
things of the artiÞcial gods of nations, cursed because they are not of the Nature of Reality.

Unfortunately, every legal form 501 non-proÞt religion and church in legal existence as an artiÞcial
person is a cursed, false creation in mammon, sacred only to the gods of nations, and attended only
by idolators that believe in and pray to Þction over Reality.

IDOLATER - noun - [Latin idololatra. See Idolatry.] 1. A WORSHIPER OF IDOLS; ONE WHO
PAYS DIVINE HONORS TO IMAGES, STATUES, OR REPRESENTATIONS OF ANY
THING MADE BY HANDS; ONE WHO WORSHIPS AS A DEITY THAT WHICH IS NOT
GOD; A PAGAN. 2. An adorer; a great admirer. (Webs1828)

—=—

Note here that the words pagan, gentile, and nation are deÞned as the same word in StrongÕs
Concordance. And so the True follower of christ would necessarily need to circumcise (become
foreign/private, separate) himself from all nations (districts, legal ethnicity/identity).

The question I posed in the beginning must be reasserted here. What does the word God mean?

For if all the gods of the nations are idols, then all men acting in the agency of a public citizen-ship
are certainly idolaters who worship the false, ßattering titles of both the current gods and the
“fathers” of the past, which are portrayed in paintings and pictures, bronzed, and even carved into
a desolate mountain in South Dakota. If Mt. Rushmore isn’t an example of idolatry I don’t know
what is!

But what other idols have we been entrained and cursed to worship?

Do you worship the cross?

!106
By who’s hands was it made?

And what are we worshiping as a deity that is not of God by attending a federal corporation calling
itself in legal, ßattering title as a religious ÒchurchÓ?

Here is where I may lose a few stubborn readers that may self-identify themselves only in their
pagan (Romanized) legal persona and admixed marks of surname and social security number
under some denominated religious corporation (a legally created artiÞcial person) instead of as a
Pure Creation of GodÕs Nature acting in Real Piety, Love, and Charity. For to come to grips with our
participation and membership in Þction (evil) even when it seems we are doing the right thing
under the legal (anti-God) licensure and false law is very difÞcult. In other words, even when we
see this legal ÒreligiousÓ matrix for the artiÞce and trap it is, we may still choose its comforts and
protections within the invisible, voluntary slave-chains of bond and surety to the nation. By turning
our collective back to Reality (Jehovah) and cowering from our most prescient duty to protect Its
Nature as part of our religiously followed Law, we lose our connection to ItÕs Being as part of that
Oneness of God (Creation). It most often feels like we donÕt have a choice to act any other way than
by the rules given us under legal law and licensure, though this is not the case, since volunteerism
(a contract of master and servant) needs not any actual knowledge of law, only consent to its false
existence, jurisdiction, and authority over the legal persona we mask ourselves in. If we choose to act
in another's property, we are self-evidently (tacitly) agreeing to the implied terms and laws of that
act. Inversely, GodÕs Law is an absolute spiritual duty, not a choice, and Its Law must be fully
under-stood due to Its non-enforceability by the laws (false doctrines and Þctions) of man. Both
require adherence to Law. And yet both are voluntary as well; being either a subjective service and
abeyance to GodÕs Nature and Law (as Master), or a contracted status to the state and its law of
persons in agency (as corporate principal). We may choose either the Real or a facsimile ßatteringly
entitled as legally Òreal.Ó To have the protection of that Highest Law, one must treat all others at all
times without exception as we would have all others treat us. If we choose to ignore and break with
our duty, we lose the protection of that Highest Law and right. Without an equitable, reciprocal
duty, a right is made mute. A right then becomes merely a tyranny over others granted no right,
and a tyrant has no duty to his patient victims.

If we, like spoiled children, retaliate and seek revenge or judgement for the foolish actions of others
against us, then we are abandoning that Highest Law of Forgiveness. We will then be subject to the
judgement of man (personhood/legal status) upon our corrupted Selves, including that false law, a
sanction for committing such a sin against the Natural Law of God. And the only reward given for
such voluntary behavior and contract to legal law is money, the equal levels of hell shared by both
debtors and creditors to mammon. To receive rendered money from its creator god (CaesarÕs
district in magistracy), we must Þrst ourselves become valued in that same money (mammon)
through legal person-hood (surety in trust/agency). We must be bestowed standing and the
capacity for sin. We must be Þguratively remade as human capital in violation of NatureÕs God. We
either Live by GodÕs Word or we live by spiritual death in the open-air prison of each nation under
the false gods, contractors, and administrators of that legal debtorÕs hell. We either take the mental
imprint of mark, name, and number or we donÕt. We cannot hide behind some perceived double-
life, for the mark and name is as permanent upon the soul as GodÕs Law (Son) is at clearing such
Þctions of spiritual death. This is the important difference between Living Freely by the honor and
duty of GodÕs Law and in obtaining a contractually bestowed legal right or privilege under the
legal, proprietary relation-ship of a commercial vessel; a member-ship bringing licensure of all
worldly and vain things in spite of GodÕs Word.

In the legal realm, illiterates are welcome and fools are preferred. This legal Þction was built just for
us and honed to publicly produce as many of us as possible in its multitude, just as any commercial
cattle lot would. This ignorance of the scriptures combined with total illiteracy in the very legalistic
(anti-God) law we are required to operate within 24/7 while in public persona and of the legal
ÒhigherÓ language it is created from is a plague of the minds of most men; a best-outcome blue-
print of satan’s perfectly corrupted society.

!107
This legal system is not created for us to ask what is right and wrong, and thus Þguratively, what
would Jesus do or what parable should I consider in my journey? Instead we seek what is
conceptually and artfully legal and illegal, asking what does man’s law say is right and wrong but
positively licensed as legal in its organized, legalized crime? What does my legal license and
ßattering diplomaÕd title tell me I can do, despite what the Higher Law of Nature does? Which part
of GodÕs Law and covenant will this police badge allow me to break? Who and how many men can
I murder by my superior ofÞcerÕs permission and also be forgiven and insured to be not-guilty by
legal judges and ceremonial priests of these masonic false religions? This is devil-speak, the
language of legalese, built of empty words with no actual substance in Nature, un-lovingly
provided by the scribes and attorneys (agents) of that legal law. It is why the word legal is deÞned
as Òanti-God.Ó For there is no honor where duty is not a spiritually driven choice. A soldier has no
True honor if he chooses to kill because his legal job and superior ofÞcer requires it, for there is no
excuse to break oneÕs Highest duty to God and man, especially when on the behalf of the
commercially driven nations. Following orders is never an excuse before God, being valid only
before a magistrate acting as false god over legal things, persons, places, and titles. For a magistrate
that governs over only the false, artful personas of men, the killing of any other Þctional person can
be made legal or allowable (licensed) even while the act of murder upon the man is sidestepped
and ignored. Fiction cannot Truly die any more than it can Truly Live in the Nature of Reality, and
so legally judging the valuation of the Nature of Life Itself is a paradoxical nightmare we must all
wake up from. That which is anti-life (antichrist and anti-God) should not be allowed to Þrst
corrupt and then judge Life. This is GodÕs self-evident Word, the unwritten Law of Nature.

Of course christ attended no denominated church (noun) to seek some artiÞcial forgiveness for his
sins, for he and his followers were the church (verb). They followed the Higher Law and avoided
the legal Þction, which prevented such sins in the Þrst place. Their Lives, their actions (verb)
deÞned them, not their name (noun) and false public reputation. This is again the difference
between worshiping in Reality (verb) and worshiping symbols of Reality in name and place (noun)
only. It is the difference between a ßattering title and the actual spiritual actions of Real piety. It is
the difference between hoping and doing. To be christ-like by following GodÕs Law as revealed by
scripture is very different from pretending to exist in a legalized title called as ÒChristianÓ while at
the same time Living as a dead, spiritually devoid life-form based solely in mammon. Legalized
religions are of course designed by false ÒprophetsÓ in Ònon-proÞtÓ corporations (artiÞcial persons)
to keep man from his own True Religion, to keep the ÒChristianÓ away from following the Word
(Son) of God, the ÒMuslimÓ away from the Word of Mohamed, the Torah Jew away from the Word
of Moses, and in general every willing man that can be fooled and tricked by words away from his
very own Nature. We worship the spoliation of the false creations of man and despoil the Real
Creation of God. We deÞle our own Natural bodies, the only Real temples of God, and instead
build stone temples with hands in masonry and treat them as sacred. And yet that which is of art,
as artiÞcial structures and things, can only be cursed in their sacred worship, for they are not of
Jehovah (Creation). In short, we do everything the scriptures tell us not to and call it ÒChristianity,Ó
and we will uncover exactly how and why this has happened as we proceed.

What type of action can it possibly be to pray (plead) to a legal (artiÞcial) judge (idol/god) than a
curse? What answer can we expect from such a legal god but one steeped in legal words of art? The
only answers to your legal prayers (pleas) will only ever be built upon legal Þction (the artiÞcial
law of Þctional persons) without the beautiful, spiritual hindrances of any duty to the Highest Law.
For you have made your election sure, having voluntarily chosen your replacement god, your false
judge, and such a corporate ofÞcer of the legal state and Bar Association (artiÞcial person) is never
bound in any way to GodÕs Nature and Law. It is a ßattering title not of Reality and so it can offer
nothing of Real substance.

Confused? Keep reading and you won't be, unless you choose to be as your very own lame excuse.

!108
 —=—

ÒFor though we walk in the ßesh, we do not war after the ßesh: (For the
weapons of our warfare are not carnal, BUT MIGHTY THROUGH GOD
TO THE PULLING DOWN OF STRONG HOLDS;) CASTING DOWN
IMAGINATIONS, AND EVERY HIGH THING THAT EXALTETH
ITSELF AGAINST THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD, AND BRINGING
INTO CAPTIVITY EVERY THOUGHT to the obedience of Christ…”
—2 Corinthians 10: 3-5, KJB

—=—

This is one of my favorite verses in scripture, as the very deÞnition of a spiritual warrior, a True
christian soldier. We are to act spiritually, not carnally. Simple. Elegant. We are to self-govern our
thoughts in protection of God and Nature. We are to defeat that which attempts to form authority
over our sense of Reality, our connection to Source, and of course cease in respecting the word-
magic of these vicegerent referees of the church and state and all things and laws legal and
ecclesiastical that stem from them. For these institutions are all designed to prevent each of us from
walking along side christ, the Son (Word/Law) of God. They cause us to imagine that our enemy is
our friend, so that we turn our backs on God.



We are thus institutionalized and publicly educated to be legally minded, and to ignore the One
and Only Example!!! We ignore the Son (Word) of God even as we pretend to worship God behind
fancy dresses and in suits and ties, to uphold our false reputations in public persona and prayer. It
is funny, actually, to imagine Jesus the christ dressing up in his fanciest duds for church service to
listen to some false priest paid in mammon according to his legal license to preach the false
doctrines of his denomination! If I showed up to church in a dirty robe smelling of days without
soap and perfumes as christ invariably would I would be declared homeless and cast out of that
false sanctuary, declared not Þt for public appearance! My teaching of the Word of God would go
unheard by such lost and egotistical fools. For no Real Charity, no Higher Love, and no Reality of
GodÕs Law of Nature Exists in that Þctional house of public idolatry. But then, christ would never
enter for worship into a ÒChristianÓ church, for the Word of God in scriptural teaching is indeed
clearly opposed to public worship. And every built-by-hands ÒchurchÓ out there dirties its alter
with the collection plates and money it accepts in tribute to mammon. Oh, the wonderful and
glorious irony! For Jesus would need to violently turn over every alter and collection plate of every
legally incorporated church out there! And imagine the tantrum he would have if he visited the
Vatican Bank! HeÕd have a heart attack! It gives me a tingling feeling in my stomach just imagining
it. HeÕd need a spreadsheet! And it would certainly be the Þrst time the Right Hand and Word
(Son) of God had anything to do with the Vatican.

These are not new concepts by any means. They are not merely the author's opinions. For it is
certainly a sign and mark of being legally branded and thus cursed when one pleads (prays) for
forgiveness before an attorney donning a ceremonial black robe in the stead of one's own God and
Creator. And like any animal, this type of abhorrent behavior is of course impressed into the mind
and customs of each of us from birth, for we appear not as our Natural selves but as the Þctional
personas we have been brainwashed into believing we are. Like the caged animal that paces back
and forth unnaturally in its physical and spiritual captivity, so too are men in their legal cages
(persons) and false law, ritualistically and without conscious control of the Self induced into a
ceremonial worship of idols and things not of Nature. Stripped of our spiritual connection to
Source, we act our part in a Þctional stage play and story (recorded history) as we suffer the legal
(unnatural) consequences and dis-eases thereof. We enter the artiÞcial timeline from our True and
timeless spirit of Life, and instead our false existence is certiÞed and tracked in the bonded surety of
a false persona, as if hell overgrew its pit and invisibly chained up all of heavens utopia to its

!109
mysterious and deceitful ways. It appears that all of Nature fell under these devil’s legal contracts,
though none of their apparently binding names (nouns) are self-evidently Real. One must Þrst
legally prove the “forest” to be a product (legal entitled property) of man’s legal system and
govern-ment in commerce before one of its agents in a ßatteringly titled legal persona may cut
down its legally, proprietarily named, individual (undivided) “trees” legally (in opposition to
God's Law) with licensure (anarchy to the Highest Law of stewardship). As long as I create,
register, and bestow the meaning of the proprietary name (noun) upon what is Real and self-
evident while at the same time causing all of my subjects to believe in (love) the legal truth of that
territorial land-claim, then I have power over the Reality of Nature that legal name (noun) re-
presents. This is especially the case if, as we see today, no men as True “christian” soldiers and
protectors of God and Creation are to be found to defeat the federal mercenary armies hired to
protect God’s adversaries (devilmasters) and their corporations in such a sick society. Fiction is the
destroyer of Nature, not in any physical exertion but in the mental retardation and anti-spirituality
it causes to the otherwise right-mindedness of men.

One only need to read the majority of older court cases to discover that defendants and plaintiffs
alike prayed to the “god” (magistrate) of the court for remedy and forgiveness, and still do by
another word. It is only our ignorance of the past and of proper legal language that dooms us to
suffer the present and future antics of these accursed, false legal gods in their own created realms
and courts. With one change of the meaning of a word such a helpless legal prayer to a false god is
arbitrarily masked by the ignorance of the spoken language.

ARBITRARY - adjective - [Latin arbitrarious.] 1. Depending on WILL or DISCRETION; NOT

GOVERNED BY ANY FIXED RULES; as, an arbitrary decision; an arbitrary punishment.
ARBITRARY POWER IS MOST EASILY ESTABLISHED ON THE RUINS OF LIBERTY
ABUSED TO LICENTIOUSNESS. 2. DESPOTIC; ABSOLUTE IN POWER; having no
external control; as, an arbitrary prince or government. (Webs1828)

—=—

A government not bound by the Law of Nature is automatically an arbitrary authority. This is
difÞcult to understand due to the legal system of strict law attached to any nation, but we must
remember that this legal law is speciÞcally intended to bypass and be in anarchy towards the Law
and Laws of Nature. This is the story of the United States, and the reason it has military bases or
troops deployed in over 150 supposedly sovereign nations and countries around the world. It is
why the term “Americanism” as a spreading cultural way of life is equal to “satanism” in many
more religiously bound cultures. For Americanism is not a culture, it is the counter or anti-culture.
It is a total lack of True spirituality, a dark void of any Higher moral Law masked behind the false,
oxymoronic, ßattering title of a ÒChristian Nation,Ó killing and maiming millions of families and
leveling whole cities in the empty name and trust of some undeÞned ÒGod.Ó

It is interesting to note the difference between the history presented by the victors and the history
of the losers. This word America is of course publicly promoted as being a word taken from the
man Amerigo Vespucci, the famed Italian explorer of the “New World.” But the aboriginal history
of the tribes that once inhabited these lands tell a different story, and carry a much more ancient
meaning for this word America.

—=—

“Since the serpent is frequently a symbol of Lucifer, it is no exaggeration

to extrapolate from this that America may well mean land of Lucifer.”
—Manly P. Hall, from ‘America's Assignment with Destiny’

—=—

!110
In fact, the ancient Mayan god of the Peruvian area of the “Americas” is called as Quetzalcoatl, and
was also known as Amaru, having the meaning of a feathered serpent god. Amaru, the serpent god,
was said to have a territory upon the earth that was so named Amaracu, which when translated
means the Land of the Great Plumed Serpent. This origin of the word America is well-accepted by
adherents of the Theosophical Society (e.g. Lucifer or “Lucius Trust”), by authors (which I do not
support but acknowledge, that one must know thy enemy), mentioned in the works of James Pryse,
William T. Still, Robert B. Stacey-Judd, and others. America was dubbed as well by Sir Francis
Bacon as the “New Atlantis,” which was storied to have as its protector the sea serpent and as its
seal the symbology the golden serpent.

This is not off subject. It is not either some empty theory of conspiratorial intent. It is presented as
that which is opposed to the false history presented about the founders (gods) and namers of this
nation, the United States of Amaracu, and the pre-tended history that it was created by True christian
men of God. When a group of men is so desperate to be publicly seen as something they are not,
that they should go to the extremes of assuming the false title of a “Christian Nation,” one must
question why such a ßattering title is needed? Of course this is a question very well answered by
the history of the actions, wars, and crimes against Nature and man by each nation and its
bloodline proprietors and posterity. It is, without question, the same false title that the Roman and
English state religions and churches pretend, as if such ridiculous ßattery may possibly cover up
their own crimes and antichrist behavior throughout history, perpetrated by the very
institutionalized Canonists of the legal and ecclesiastical law of organized crime, murder, and
piracy in the name of God.

But a criminal knows only how to play his own part. These institutions of church and state are not
powerful because some men with criminal minds are somehow supernaturally more powerful than
the rest, but because the masses of men in the multitude have been kept from the very foundations
of scriptural Law by these criminal elements in their corrupting institutions. And so the multitude
pays tribute and respect to such artiÞcial persons, to the corporations of church and state, and thus
to men bearing ßattering titles demanding to be called as father, lord, and vicar of christ. It is not
the criminals fault, it is the fault of the followers of criminals. It is your own fault while at the same
time mine alone to bear. For we have each individually chosen our gods and made our elections
politically sure, using their property (person/legal status) to vote for Þctional persons, places, and
things of law before that of our True Nature’s intent and will.

There is no political solution to this spiritual problem. There is only the quitclaiming and
abandoning of what gives it power, which is the breath of pretended life we breathe into Þctions of
law, the patented property of legal personages (artiÞcial statuses, names, and titles) and money
valuation in commerce. For these are not Real things, merely commercial products of the
imagination created to keep us plugged in to this new age world and cult-ure of the lucifer doctrine
(law).

In these modern times man only prays (pleads) to the court of devils (attorneys) in agency, on
behalf of his assumed name (person/status), the strawman, while appearing in its beneÞcently
ascribed surname and for no other purpose. The agent lives (is given artiÞcial existence/legal
status) only to serve its principal. It is but a small step above feudal slavery; a public franchise of
vested, voluntary servitude. And the magistrates (lesser gods) of the court serve no other purpose
than this: the administration of their principal’s property. The judge persons, not men, for only
persons may break the law. The person is the slave, and the master only has power over its
property. Man’s appearance in any court is always and without exception a voluntary one in
agency, for his voluntary choice to use the property (persona) of the government under a devilish
contract in order to conduct himself though public, commercial, ÒinterstateÓ ad-ventures in Þction
is entirely his own. And so man has only one reason to appear in court, which is to re-present a legal
name, title, number, and mentally impressed mark that belongs to another as if it is an actual
Living creature. The reason for this is clear under God's Word (Law), for man is sinning against his
own Nature, pretending to be what is artiÞcial and thus opposed to (in sin against) the God of
Nature and all self-Existence. Man Exists as Self. A person exists only as non-self-Existent Þction.

!111
What powers its Self, as that which is Life, is only of God. Again, if this sounds like the foolish
rantings of religion, you better wake the hell up. This is Reality. This is the very structure of the
Law, of the nation, and of the court system gods you pray to and that currently binds you. To deny
this is the mark of a fool.

Man breathes life into that Þctional persona (strawman), giving it a Þctional existence and unnatural
movement, so that the judge (agent) may practice his jurisdiction as lord-god and administrator
over that which belongs to his district and principal jurisdiction, assigned by his judicial title’s legal
creator (god). This is not dissimilar to any board game, where once the game is started, the
presumption of a set of ÒrulesÓ (make-believe law) governs the game-pieces (Þctional persons) to
ensure their forced, legal equality, and thus to ensure absolute competition at all times. There is no
board game called harmony or charity, now is there? The judge is only god over the strawman,
having proprietary jurisdiction over that strawman, and thus only on behalf of that strawman does
the man pray to that god (judge) as its agent. One may bow to his own employer (principal), and
yet defy in every way a principal other than his own. This rule applies to the jurisdictions of both
corporations and nations, for they are one and the same. Public and private corporations are merely
the love child of government corporations. One cannot falsely exist without the other, and certainly
not in Nature.

The puppet (full name of the person) belongs to the state, and so the man acting as its puppet
master (agent) may only enjoy the use of that puppet by acknowledging the state as its creator
(principal) and master in authority, and thus its god (lawmaker). For the judge is a lesser god of the
nation, and idols can only exist if they are be-lieved in and religiously worshiped. Judges are also
called as “your Worship” of course. This is the design of legal jurisdiction.

Examples of this fact are still in practice, meaning that the words have not been altered to hide the
Truth.

In the Courts of Scotland judges are all addressed as "My Lord" or "My Lady.” They are generally
referred to as "Your Lordship" or "Your Ladyship.”

In the Courts of England and Wales, Supreme Court judges are entitled as ÒJusticesÓ of the
Supreme Court, while the Justices of the Supreme Court who do not hold life peerages have
generally been given the courtesy style of "Lord" or “Lady.”

Press Notice
Date: 13 December 2010

Courtesy titles for Justices of the Supreme Court

Her MAJESTY The Queen has signed a warrant declaring that every Justice of the Supreme
Court of the United Kingdom will in future be styled as ‘LORD’ or ‘LADY’, to ensure that
all Justices of the Court are described and addressed in a similar manner.

The announcement means that Sir John Dyson, the most recent appointment to the Supreme
Court, who is not a Life Peer and was appointed from the Court of Appeal of England and
Wales, will now be styled Lord Dyson…

—Press release from The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

—=—

The royal bloodline top-god of the Þctional United Kingdom has spoken, her arbitrary ecclesiastical
warrant creating the new law of royal Þction, a forced title and respect of that title of silly looking
men and women dressed in the robes and wigs of magistracy.

!112
The word “Lord” is also used in the Bible, often mistaken by the casual, dog-Latin reader to always
mean Jehovah or the Highest God. But it’s very important to understand that by calling a judge as
“Lord” or as any other title of nobility or respected authority, we are defeating our own will and
power under God. Let us see what the Bible states about this:

—=—

“…Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are
covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord WILL NOT IMPUTE
SIN.”
—Romans 4: 7-8, KJB

—=—

The word “Lord” as used in this verse is a translation of Strong's #G2962 (kyrios). This is again a
general, ambiguous word like “god,” which spans the realm of meanings and so must be
considered by its original intention. The word Lord in this case is not necessarily a reference to
Jehovah (God), but to the gods of the nations, and speciÞcally to the judges of persons. The use of
this word requires another question Þrst, which is: What God have you chosen and made election?

Strong’s outline of Biblical usage based on Thayer’s Greek Lexicon explains that the translated
word Lord (kyrios) can mean all of the following:

“HE TO WHOM A PERSON OR THING BELONGS, ABOUT WHICH HE HAS POWER

OF DECIDING; MASTER, LORD:

(1) The possessor and disposer of a thing:

(a) The owner; ONE WHO HAS CONTROL OF THE PERSON, THE MASTER;
(b) IN THE STATE: THE SOVEREIGN, PRINCE, CHIEF, THE ROMAN EMPEROR.

(2) Is A TITLE OF HONOUR expressive of RESPECT and reverence, WITH WHICH

SERVANTS GREET THEIR MASTER.

(3) This title is given to: God, the Messiah.”

—=—

And so in re-examining this verse, we Þnd that only when the ÒLordÓ (kyrios) of the legal system,
state, or other sovereignty has no power and jurisdiction over and thus cannot impute sin upon a
man, only then is that man blessed by the True God (Jehovah). And to be clear, such lords (kyrios) of
the nations may only impute sin upon any man if that man voluntarily uses the property of the
state, which is the person (strawman legal status), under the doctrine of volunteerism, also known
as the doctrine of “master and servant.” A man in persona (mask), in other words, has no power of
choice. The master decides all courses of action by its written, positively declared and executively
enforced law. And though the illusion of choice in such matters as occupation and social occasion
clouds one’s view of these Truths, the master of any property is the Lord of that property. Again,
the person of man is the property of its creator, i.e., the state, the king (crown corporation), etc.

It is also interesting to note that in Biblical usage, this word (kyrios) is also translated by the king to
the word “master” and “sir.” And so we have also in this word our lesser gods.

Lay magistrates in the United Kingdom are sometimes still addressed as "Your Worship" in
England, mainly by solicitors, and also as “Sir” or “Madam.” And how many of us are publicly
trained to use this word sir to address those who pretend any type of perceived authority over us,
including our own parents? Sadly, it is technically proper English (dog-Latin) for a man acting in

!113
the agency of personhood to use this terminology, for a strawman is property of and controlled and
under the law of the state and its magistrate gods. The only difference between a slave and a
person is that the slave knowingly and without hesitation calls his owner as master, while the
public person must be tricked through language arts to do the same. And a free (franchise) slave is
much more productive than a chained one. Which type of slave is more ignorant even when
publicly and university (syndicalist) educated is up for question. But the resulting legal status of
subjection to some master is ultimately the same.

And so I say again, you will have a “god” whether you like it or not. The only question is which
“god” will you choose to worship and respect? Perhaps the importance of these words are now
becoming clear. Perhaps your own love or hate for religion is now being shown as your greatest
folly in learning, knowing, and Living the Law (Word). And maybe, just maybe, you might be
loosing your arrogant disposition and ego just as I did, when suddenly you realize what a fool you
have been brainwashed and purposefully misled to be.

The legal matrix has you…

Back in the United States, subordinate or inferior jurisdiction judges in US legal practice are
sometimes called “MAGISTRATES,” although in the federal court of the United States, they are
called “MAGISTRATE JUDGES.” Subordinate judges in US legal practice are usually called
"MASTERS" or "SPECIAL MASTERS.”

In many states throughout the United States, a judge is generally addressed as “Your Honor” or
“Judge” when in the title and action of presiding over the jurisdiction of the court. In the Superior
Court of Los Angeles County, rule 3.95 of the Los Angeles Superior Court Rules states that a judge
must be addressed only as “YOUR HONOR,” and never as “Judge,” as “Judge + surname,” or as
“ma’am” or “sir.” In this way, through this command of forced respect, he who submits himself in
agency to the courts words (false law) is instantly powerless over its will. For the person (property)
is all that is recognized therein, and to appear as property is to appear as a slave.

HONOR - verb - To accept a bill of exchange, or to PAY a note, check, or accepted bill, at
maturity and according to its tenor. - noun - In English law, a seigniory of several manors
HELD UNDER ONE BARON OR LORD PARAMOUNT. Also those DIGNITIES OR
PRIVILEGES, DEGREES OF NOBILITY, KNIGHTHOOD, AND OTHER TITLES, WHICH
FLOW FROM THE CROWN AS THE FOUNTAIN OF HONOR. In American law. The
CUSTOMARY TITLE OF COURTESY given to judges of the higher courts, and occasionally
to some other ofÞcers; as “his honor,” “your honor.” (Black4)

HONORABLE - A TITLE OF COURTESY given in England to the younger CHILDREN of

earls, and the children of viscounts and barons; and, collectively, to the house of commons. In
America, the word is used as A TITLE OF COURTESY for various CLASSES OF
OFFICIALS, but without any clear lines of distinction. (Black4)

ACCOUTERMENTS - noun - 1. DRESS; equipage; FURNITURE FOR THE BODY;

appropriately, military dress and ARMS; equipage for military SERVICE. 2. In common
usage, an old or unusual dress. (Webs1828)

ACCOUTERED - participle passive - DRESSED IN ARMS; equipped. (Webs1828)

—=—

To be clear, children are bestowed with the title of “honor.” Children! Again, CHILDREN!!! Oh,
and judges also. In other words, the title of honor (noun) has nothing to do with acting in or with
True Honor (verb) under any Higher, Moral Law. It is an empty title of nobility that means nothing
in Reality. The mere recognition of fabled noble blood guarantees such ßattering title and false
respect by sanction (punishment) of law, very much like the false title of “Christian” or any other

!114
“protected” legal status. Please bear in mind that if something is protected by the legal law, it
therefore must be opposed to the Natural Law, for otherwise it would need no such artiÞce of
protection. This includes such Þctions as equal rights, gay rights, women's rights, and obviously
the ßattering titles of the ofÞcers (gods) of the courts.

As we will fully discuss later, the word Arms when capitalized means heraldry, as genealogy, as the
fabled bloodline of noble or ignoble blood and the family crest (Arms) that rightfully bears it. It is
purely for public show, for use only in the Romanized pomp and circumstance of the bread and
circus galleria of such legally Þctionalized accouterments. In other words, it gets you into private
parties with all the a-hole pretenders of nobility while the commoners worship you as if you are a
god. And thatÕs because you are part of the supposed bloodline of the godship; the sovereignty of
private People not of the nations, as the ÒPosterityÓ of the actual People these nations were created
to protect the false authority of. So relax, put your guns (arms) away, and learn why those legalized
(permitted) guns (registered as legal ÒÞre-armsÓ) are being taken away incrementally and quite
legally from the person (property) you registered them in, not from you (the man) but from the
Þctional public persona you foolishly, habitually taxed them to, all because you are not Bearing
your private Arms (bloodline) and instead bear the ßag and seal (legal Arms) of the Þctional nation
that your Þctional person was legally (artiÞcially) birthed into, certiÞed, and registered as a public
subject, not a private master. Slaves have no rights but what are assigned and granted them. Only
private men bear the Arms of their own blood heritage instead of the false Þctions and ßag of a
stranger.

If this doesnÕt make sense quite yet, think of it this way. Your guns are published as property of a
United States public person, the person being the property of the district (a distress, distraint, and
seizure). Thus they are considered legally as registered property of a legal person, which is the
registered property of the state (district). Are you starting to get the picture? Published guns
belong to the government! The reason I am not publishing this work (book) is the same reason I do
not publish (publicly register) my guns (arms) as legally styled, publicly owned ÒÞre-armsÓ under
that legal strawman not my own. As soon as I do that, I lose all private, unalienable rights to hold
guns and automatically agree to be bound by any laws and gun-bans on public U.S. citizen-ships of
the district that owns them as property (slaves), for the registered gun (legal ÒÞre-armÓ) is so
named as property of the legal persona, the false commercial id-entity, not the man acting as agent
for that person. Remember, the admixed name is not your own, and there is no possible legal way
to register anything in one's True christian name alone. This would be pointless, since the Þrst
name is a private name that needs no authority from false gods. A public person in surname and
number and under public law is simply not entitled to private privileges or so-called God-given,
unalienable rights simply because a public person is a slave of its owner (the state), not its user
(you). If not already, this will all be clear by the end of this work. What you do with this in-
formation is of course your choice, and only you can make your election sure. Choose your master
(God) wisely.

So where did this vulgar, mass-delusional fallacy of guns-as-Arms come from?

The stage-play entitled Cato, a Tragedy, was utilized and made to be performed to the militia troops
by the Òfounding fathersÓ of the United States, who in their own roles as representative actors
(agents) for the States (private People) would quote from the play often and with the feigned
passion of slaveholders selling freedom. According to William Randall in his 1997 publication,
George Washington: A Life, the soon to be pseudo-king (president) of the commercial union had Cato,
A Tragedy performed for the Continental Army at Valley Forge. It contains the well-plagiarized and
infamous line, “It is not now time to talk of aught/But chains or conquest, LIBERTY OR
DEATH,Ó from Act II, Scene 4. The phrase "Liberty or Death" subsequently appeared upon the
Culpeper Minutemen ßag created in 1775, which was infamously known as well by its ÒDonÕt
Tread On MeÓ phrase. And so like most patriotic Þctions we celebrate as ÒoriginalÓ history,
Washington had already invoked the propaganda, mental conditioning, and Þctional entrainment
of what would later be called Hollywood and Madison Avenue into the reasons why the common
man should Þght for WashingtonÕs noble bloodline of King John to become the independent,

!115
private People (States) for which the commoners should serve in constituted voluntary servitude
and legalized slavery. And we unwittingly bear the family crest (Arms) of Washington today on the
United States ßag. Of course all we ever see in our history books is that popularized, plagiarized
version by Patrick Henry, where he swooned men into war by his stage-acting, stating ÒGive me
liberty or give me death!”

One sure thing about history: itÕs always an outright lie, portrayed as the embellished story of the
victors of commerce and war.

—=—

“Every man is brutish by his knowledge; EVERY FOUNDER IS

CONFOUNDED BY THE GRAVEN IMAGE: FOR HIS MOLTEN
IMAGE IS FALSEHOOD, AND THERE IS NO BREATH IN THEM.”
—Jeremiah 51:17, KJB

—=—

So let us look into the Arms of that idolatrous founder of this nation, so that the reader may have
no doubt as to what it is to privately and publicly Bear the Arms of either your own, private family
heraldry or that of the nation that enslaves you as its false, surrogate ÒfatherÓ through the process
of legal birth registration.

WashingtonÕs Heraldic and masonic Arms are certainly the most revered in the nation. Because this
difference between guns as public arms and bloodline as private heraldic Arms is so important for
the common, public citizenship to distinguish between, let us take a quick look at the history of the
Washington family Arms in America. For the use of white stars on a blue background for the
American Flag was also a tribute to the borrowed family Arms of George WashingtonÕs lineage, the
bloodline of AmericaÕs favorite false god still displayed in honorary deity and of course ßown on
holidays by many public, non compos mentis citizen-ships having no idea the meaning of the Arms
(ßag) they are worshiping and bearing:

—=—

3.2  The Washington Arms and Ecclesiastical Heraldry

The CATHOLIC Archdiocese of Washington honors the Þrst President with the three mullets,
or FIVE-POINTED STARS, in the third quarter of its ARMS; the THREE SIX-POINTED
STARS in the second quarter pay tribute to Pius VI, the Pope at the time of the American
Revolution. The reference to the Washington ARMS is more obvious in those of the Episcopal
Diocese, which replaces the center mullet with a mural crown and adds a blue chief with A
GOLDEN JERUSALEM CROSS. Two Episcopal churches in the Washington area also draw
on the Washington arms for inspiration. Washington was a member of the vestry of the Þrst
one shown, Christ Church in Alexandria, while the second, St. James, is a relatively new parish
on part of the original Mount Vernon estate. The Þnal coat, belonging to Blessed Sacrament
Catholic Church in Martinsville, N.J., commemorates Washington's nearby encampment
during the war…

3.5  The Washington Arms and Civic Heraldry

As already mentioned, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FLIES A FLAG THAT IS

ACTUALLY A BANNER OF THE ARMS OF THE WASHINGTON FAMILY. Contrary to
what is often reported, however, it does not use this design on a shield AS A COAT OF
ARMS PROPER. WASHINGTON COUNTY, VA., DOES USE A SHIELD WITH THE

!116
 WASHINGTON ARMS, but "differences" them in accordance with heraldic custom, in this
case changing the color of the mullets to blue. Fredericksburg, Virginia, also draws on the
Washington arms in differenced form, in this case using the crest with a cardinal in place of
the original raven. Meanwhile the town of Washington, Me., ßies a ßag that combines the bars
and mullets with an indented red and blue band at the hoist signifying the mountains and
rivers of the area. The city of Charles Town, W. Va., and the town of Washington, N.C., ALSO
BOTH EMPLOYS THE WASHINGTON ARMS, BUT IN THEIR ORIGINAL FORM. It is
generally recognized as improper heraldic practice to borrow the arms of another in
undifferenced form.

3.6  The Washington Arms and Organizational Heraldry

Finally, a number of private associations and clubs in the Washington, D.C., area use the
Washington arms as the basis of their organizational symbols. The Saint Andrews Society,
for example, impales a variation of the Washington armsÑwith a red chief bearing a thistle
between two mullets at the topÑwith the white St. Andrew's cross of Scotland. These arms
were GRANTED to the society by the Lord Lyon King of Arms, the Scottish heraldic
authority. The Sulgrave Club, an old and exclusive ladies' club located in an grand mansion on
Massachusetts Avenue, uses the Washington arms with the red altered to blue. And the District
Yacht Club ßies a burgee that is clearly derived from the shield of the city's namesake.

—The American Heraldry Society, By Joseph McMillan, excerpt from article as it appeared in The American Herald, No. 1 (2006)

Ñ=Ñ

When it comes to the 2nd Amendment of the United States, the reader needs to know some facts
that will help in cognition of what will be presented herein. Firstly, the notion of ÒArms” as merely
weapons, namely guns, is a public-minded and vulgar concept and is why we are enslaved to those
who actually Bear their True Arms and private family bloodline as the posterity (bloodline) of the
private People. Even a cursory look at each individual State ßag, the word State meaning ÒPeople,Ó
reveals many heraldic signs and royal symbols of the old-stock Coats of Arms. The common, public
people (chattel) of the United States appear as rambling fools whenever this 2nd Amendment is
spoken about by us and further entertained in the mainstream and alternative media machines, for
it was certainly not made to protect any public right of persons (property/slaves). This private,
reserved right to bear Arms is protected only when one actually Bears them privately and thus is
recognized by their blood, not as a bloodless (attainted) public vessel (citizen-ship). To Bear Arms is
to signify one's negative right to reserve all Natural rights from the nation and its artiÞcial of law as
unalienable, a right the constitution thus protects negatively as a private right.

Ñ=Ñ

   “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be

construed to deny or disparage others RETAINED BY THE PEOPLE.”
—Constitution for the united States of America, Ninth Amendment

Ñ=Ñ

What was not given was reserved and thus retained by the several (private) States (People).

But public persons of (belonging to) the United States corporation (district) are not Òthe PeopleÓ of
each private State, and so have no capacity to reserve any rights from their chosen, false creator
god (the state). As agents for these public citizen-ships (status/property) of the United States, our
blood is considered as tainted (in attainder) and therefore not capable of inheritance. Fictional
characters created by corporations (nations) have no such private rights in public personhood, and
thus no capacity for the reservation of any rights, which is why in public-mindedness we bear the

!117
Arms of the surrogate, legal father of the personas (state property) we use in surety, waving like
idiots not of right mind the ßag and seal (Arms) of the United States district. And for this egregious
error, all property we believe that we own (in usufruct) is pirated from our vessels by the private
ÒPeopleÓ of private States through their company store called the United States.

To be clear, and as will be shown, the father of a US strawman (Þctional person) can be no man and
can have no blood, for Þctional persons carry no blood consideration or lawful capacity to bear
True, private Arms. No bloodline, no heraldry. Thus, the state is the father (god) of public persons,
and the only Arms any strawman may bear is that of its legal father (creator and controller), which
is the ßag and seal of the United States.



I pledge allegiance, to the ßag (Washingtonian Arms) of the bloodline of the united States (private People) of
America…

And this above all other aspects of this grand delusion of the legal matrix is why the distinction
and under-standing of what is Real and what is Þction, of what is of God and what is of false gods,
must be at the forefront of our knowledge and the foundational guidepost for all of our actions.

This will be one of the most difÞcult concepts to accept for the patriotic reader who knows nothing
of his nation but what his public education and alternative ÒpatriotÓ or ÒtruthÓ radio shows parrot
incorrectly on a constant basis, followed by those mainstream propagandists in their reinforcement
of this greatest of logical fallacies. We are ruled not merely by lies, but by our strong support and
utterly religious and patriotic belief in those lies to the point that we might even kill to protect
them. Denial is a strong emotion, and no one understands this emotion more than this author.
What I write here is only the unadulterated Truth, and my only intent is to help us all come out of
this commercialized Stockholm Syndrome we all suffer from at the hands of the few families that
control the pirate cove of the United States, the holding company of that private People of each
several (private) State (People). They are ÒWe, the People,Ó not us, anymore than the indentured
servants and slaves were part of ÒWe, the PeopleÓ at the founding of this company store styled as
the federal United States. This information is intimately pertinent to the rest of this work.

For now, just know that when children are granted titles of ÒhonorÓ by their mere noble birth, they
are receiving recognition of their family bloodline by heraldic Arms, which they will thus privately
bear as the many generations before them did. Thus the most corrupt of men are forced by law to
be addressed as the entitled ÒYour Honor,Ó either by blood or by prostitution to the constituted
authorities (the bloodline). This is not True honor, merely a ßattering title based on fabled
genealogies and legal accoutrements. One thing that cannot be denied is that this is the same class
system that has been in place for thousands of years. Nothing has changed, I assure you.

—=—

“And my God (translated from Strong's H430 - ÒelohiymÓ - referring to the

plural, false, legal or mythological and Babylonian gods as titled kings and
other magistrates, the creators of art, not meant here as the True God of
Nature ÒJehovahÓ) É



“And my God (elohiym/plural gods) put into mine heart to gather together
the nobles, and the rulers, and the people, THAT THEY MIGHT BE
RECKONED BY GENEALOGY. And I found a REGISTER of the
genealogy of them which came up at the Þrst, and found written thereinÉÓ
—Nehemiah 7:5, KJB (emphasis mine)

—=—

!118
 —=—

“THESE SOUGHT THEIR REGISTER AMONG THOSE THAT WERE

RECKONED BY GENEALOGY, but they were not found: THEREFORE
WERE THEY, AS POLLUTED, PUT FROM THE PRIESTHOOD.”
—Ezra 2:62, KJB

—=—

“And his brethren BY THEIR FAMILIES, WHEN THE GENEALOGY

OF THEIR GENERATIONS WAS RECKONED, WERE THE CHIEF,
Jeiel, and Zechariah…”
—1 Chronicles 5:7, KJB

—=—

“And the number of them, AFTER THEIR GENEALOGY BY THEIR

GENERATIONS, HEADS OF THE HOUSE OF THEIR FATHERS,
mighty men of valour, was twenty thousand and two hundred.”
—1 Chronicles 7:9, KJB

—=—

It is completely unreasonable to ponder that Jehovah, the God of all Existence and Nature and the
Universe, would need us to make a list of each of our names, numbers, and statistics for legal
processing and registration, as if he has a Rolodex. In fact, nothing makes me laugh more than the
thought that I could have ever read this verse and thought this to be True. Perhaps the angels made
a clerical error, and thats why the gods and their United Nations were created, just to help old
Jehovah out with registering his ßock? IÕm sure biometrics were GodÕs Plan all alongÉ right? And
Þngerprints were surely made in the Beginning just so that we might all be commercially
catalogued as proprietary felons and terrorists by birth in a giant, multi-national database? Oh, in
what mysterious ways the gods do work us overÉ

Now, the question you must ask your Self is this: how has your blood been registered and
Þguratively tainted within this legal reckoning, you publicly polluted subject and goyim of the
nation of those private, sovereign ÒPeopleÓ (States united) and the royal bloodlines of kings? What
Arms do you Bear that prove your untainted Nature? Where is your protective, private Coat of
Arms?

As a public person of the United States or other nation, the answer to these questions is by the legal
law of persons certainly not those of your own genealogical family. It, by law, cannot be. If you are
a participating citizen-ship of the United States then your blood is considered to be corrupted and
in attainder. You are acting synthetically (in sin). Slaves (public persons) have no such privilege or
Natural Freedoms, for property is never free. Only men in private, not public personas (legal
entities), carry the privy of Bearing their bloodline in Arms. Remember, the US public citizen-ship
bears only the Arms of its Þctional father (principal/master), and all public citizen-ships of the
United States are the legally generated ÒsonsÓ (property) of that Þctional nation and its ÒfathersÓ in
union, and bear only its ßag and seal (Arms). No blood is offered or recognized within the United
States district (seizure, distress, distraint). Blood is a product of Nature, not law.

!119
It is easiest to comprehend why, by the legal code and rules of manÕs artiÞcial law, these gods are
required to be called by such speciÞc, ßattering titles according to their rank in society. To hold
something in honor (as artiÞcially sacred), for instance, would of course be the opposite of holding
it in pretended contempt. This is the legal (anti-God) respect of a lie. For to hold such a lie in honor
is to hold Nature (Source) in contempt. It is a curse given the illusion of sacredness, and this
collective delusion is what fuels the whole magic show. The title (status) one bears implies that the
sayer of any artful word expresses presumed consent to the honor (pre-tended legitimacy) of any
other bearer of corrupted, higher legal titles. This is similar to military ranking and orders. By
consenting to such hierarchy of pretended gods and masters, one is liable (has the capacity) to be
held in contempt only because he already expressly consented to honor and trust that which is
contemptible to GodÕs Nature and Law. This is word-magic, as the invoking of imaginary things by
soliciting the occulted incantation of these ancient, linguistic terms of art.

To put it another way, our society is one that is required by custom and presumable contractual
obligation to respect and honor that which deserves neither respect or honor. Here again we are
speaking of a mere ßattering title that has no relevance to the meaning of these words. The title
does not make the man. To call white as black does not make it so in Reality. To label a manÕs
person with the ßattering title of ÒYour HonorÓ is to respect the name without demanding works,
actions, and proofs of self-Existence. To call an administrative judge as ÒYour HonorÓ is to steal
away any possibility of later claiming that judge to be in dishonor. Once the ÒHonorÓ is recognized
in ßattery of legal title, the subject to that false title no longer has any recourse to withdraw his
respect of it. When Þction is honored, Nature is dishonored, and NatureÕs Highest Law is
pretended lost in that contractual hell.

As far as the bloodline of kings, it is very important to note what the Bible states about the seed of
men like Abraham. The concept of a king acting in GodÕs stead is not an inherently evil one. In fact,
as a measure of the conduct and actions of any king, one would certainly wish that man to be as
christ-like and thus God-like as possible, using his power only to protect the privacy and dignity of
each man negatively under his kingdom. And so we read from the Bible that this mythological
genealogy that has been used by so many generations of corrupt kings and queens is quite against
the scriptural precedent of this ofÞce of king.

—=—

“For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, WAS NOT TO
ABRAHAM, OR TO HIS SEED, THROUGH THE LAW, BUT
THROUGH THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF FAITH. FOR IF THEY WHICH
ARE OF THE LAW BE HEIRS, FAITH IS MADE VOID, and the promise
made of none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law
is, there is no transgression. Therefore it is OF FAITH, that it might be
BY GRACE; to the end THE PROMISE MIGHT BE SURE TO ALL THE
SEED; NOT TO THAT ONLY WHICH IS OF THE LAW, but to that also
which is OF THE FAITH of Abraham; who is the father of us all…”
—Romans 4: 13-16, KJB

—=—

This is an extremely important and damning verse exposing the absolute fraud of the royal families
in monarchy and pretended democracies today. The petty family bloodlines of the incest-laden
kings and queens of modern nations and empires, whom in the past and present would without
hesitation slit the throat of their brother, mother, or father to gain control of that impatient crown,

!120
relies strictly on those legally conÞrmed, fabled genealogical trees of history as their claim to rule
over all others in the name, title, and ofÞce of God-heads. They have no actual Grace, no True Faith,
and are not keepers of the promise spoken of here. They do not deserve the right to rule because
they declare that right only through the strict measures of man's law without fulÞllment of any
promise to uphold God's Word. They take the title of the christos (the anointed) but play no part
resembling It. They rule by authority without Love; by artiÞce without Piety. Their rule is by
executive force of law and ßattering title alone, never by appeal to their actual deeds and actions,
and certainly not with the Grace of God. They are the heirs of corporations, of legal estates in
mammon, having and showing nothing of God's Nature. They ßail about in fancy dress and jewels,
attending extravagant balls and ceremonies while those they are in charge of wallow in poverty
and hunger. Let them eat cake! They bestow themselves with ritualistic titles such as ÒYour GraceÓ
and ÒYour HonorÓ not because it is the Truth, but because only when these falsely proclaimed and
legally ratiÞed ßattering titles are enforced violently through the civil law can these titles be made
as artiÞcial but authoritative truths. But legal truths are only their own proprietarily conÞrmed and
forcibly accepted lies protected by their own legalistic sanctions and enforcers of laws. They are as
frail as a dying tree whose leaves can bear no more legitimate Life-Force to milk, for such True
Legitimacy is not passed by the vulgar seed and legal blood consideration of man through a
contrived accident of birth, but by fulÞlling the promise and Word (Law) of God in Righteousness.

Of all the lessons we must learn, the Truth that property does not Exist in Nature is paramount to
all other knowledge. The idea of property, when legally considered, is always artiÞcially drawn
lines and words upon a map. It is nothing more or less than this, and it therefore must be taken and
kept by force alone. To consider all land the Property of Jehovah (The Creator) is to invoke only the
Natural Law, to respect and expect reciprocal respect as the negative Duty of all men under the
Highest Law to be left alone wherever we may settle. This requires spiritual consciousness of the
Law. It requires purposeful fulÞllment of that Law. And most of all, it requires the extermination of
all conceptualizations in mammon. For only when land is valued in monetary means should any
man covet the settlement of another. And what any man gains from his settled land is also not his
own, but the wealth of all in need. This is the only responsible land ownership, and the invocation
of the Highest Law without error or greed defeats any reason for trespass or theft by others. This is
True Honor, proven only by the spirit of ones actions. For the Honor of holding lands can only be
met by the respect of NatureÕs Law, the Law of Creation, which no man may ever in Truth (Reality)
be above. This is not a utopian pipe dream. This is the only True Law. And as the scriptures in-
struct, we must separate ourselves from the legalistic multitude to fulÞll this Law, not try and
change the evils that are the legal systems and nations of false law. What is of God, including the
Law of Nature, is not and cannot ever be compatible with what is of manÕs legal inventions.

It is very important then to realize that the ÒbloodÓ right of return for ÒJewsÓ to ÒIsraelÓ is as well a
lie, just as it is for any religion. To be an Israelite is to act like an Israelite, not to accept a ßattering
title of ÒJewÓ in an unlawfully occupied legal ÒstateÓ called by the empty name of Israel, just as to
be a man of God is to follow and act christ-like. No one in their right mind can believe that moral
standards of the Natural Law or even that of other Religious doctrines can possibly be passed via
the transmission of blood from father or mother to son. This invention of the Jewish People, as
several Jewish authors have commented, is a political lie of great deceit and harmful intent.

As for the so-called ÒChristian nationsÓ and kingdoms, this antiquated system of blood-heirship
and land-lords that earn nothing of their keep and who do nothing to prove their worthiness to be
of the promise must die with the very governmental structure and law that protects it by legal
means. For the spirit of this custom is dead or at least dormant, and the ancestral seed that is
passed has lost its purpose and its promise, granted today only by the corrupt words of the legal
and ecclesia of law. We are ruled by the spiritually dead pretending to be as Living Heirs of the
ÒBloodÓ of christ, whose souls are snuffed out by false light of the darkness in the devilry and
piracy they practice. For they are worshipers and followers only of the laws of men and mammon.
In the end, their whole power structure is based on one single thing: romanticism. Its foundation is
the Roman illusion of law, justiÞed still by the romantic tales and Þctional purpose and purity of

!121
intention by these birthright gods in ancestry. And the modern commercial matrix built around this
big legal lie depends on the words of those dead demagogues and false gods.

The author stresses again here that you, the reader, will always have some god, and that your
election must be as sure as the law you elect and thus choose voluntarily to follow. But we must be
clear that no man chooses his God. You choose your Law, and only through that Law and your
religious following of it is your election made sure. If you are surety for a legal person, then your
gods are indisputably the legal kind. Try as you may, you simply cannot escape this Truth.

If you haven’t quite picked up on the clues yet, the author is trying to tell you here that the word
“god” is not a religious term at all, but a legal term of men. God is a term of Law! The early Bibles
did not use this quite general word “god,” for it has no set meaning, and because God has no actual
name or title such as this. In other words, Jehovah was considered the unspoken and holiest of holy
names of God, too sacred to be forged into some vulgar word of art. If the Highest authority or as
even the Breathe of Life was Its root meaning, the word Jehovah (i.e., Yĕhovah or YHWH) was used.
If the legal gods of nations were meant, then speciÞc words like elohym were used. And if merely
the power and authority of any god was intended, we Þnd words like archon and theos. All these are
purposefully and confusingly translated as the word “god” in the English language (dog-Latin)
Bible of the king (false god/archon). And Its capitalization as well generally signiÞes the modern
intent to distinguish between these conceptualizations of different levels and vicars of God.

But we must not forget that the same consideration is made upon those claiming to be legally a
ÒChristianÓ as their own ßattering title, as if by that pretended, ßattering title only they should be
respected and honored as one that actually follows God’s Law through the exemplifying of christ.
And to be frank, this is exactly what every administrative judge does in every court case it
administers. The man behind the robe seeks to summon the man of God through his magic
spellings over that which is voluntarily ad-mixed and in surety with the states legal and
proprietary Þctional persona (status) in every case. He calls on the surname as a god (magistrate)
and we answer in a pathetic prayer and appearance like a dog begging for a bone; not because we
are forced to answer in persona but because we believe that we must. We have nothing of the power
of christ (spiritual knowledge) in us, and so we are brainwashed and entrained to act accordingly
to his devilry, playing the part of attorney (devil’s advocate) and stand-in god (magistrate) for the
legal state of the devil’s realm.

Threat of violence is no excuse under God for respecting legal (anti-God) names and titles or for
appearing in false persona in any court jurisdiction. Just ask Jesus christ. The choice is always
yours, and Truly Free men under God's Law must be willing to suffer or die for every moral choice
they make. He who escapes the legal matrix will certainly be persecuted by all the agents of that
artful simulation, which may deÞned as potentially all agenticly acting public citizen-ships that
love their servitude and beneÞts in mammon, suckling from the left hand of the false god that feeds
them. True Freedom is not some glamorous state of false being in extravagance or feigned honor,
but a state of Being Real and always standing in honor of Truth without respect of lies and liars.
And to be clear, the Truth-teller is always the enemy of the state, for the rose hangs over all of its
dwellings. The Truth is more feared than any bomb or army, for in the public’s hands the Truth is
the apocalypse (disclosure) of the wizards behind the curtains of church and state. Revelation is but
the Truth of Jehovah and Its Law unbound and uncovered.

Most importantly though, we must know that these are ancient terms dating from the feudal land-
lords and barons (gods). Government is most easily deÞned as nothing more than a union of
private land-lords drawn together in contracted (constituted) protection of each other against all
public commoners of the world (those with no landholdings), either foreign or domestic.

LORD - A FEUDAL SUPERIOR or PROPRIETOR; one of whom a fee or ESTATE IS HELD.

A TITLE OF HONOR OR NOBILITY belonging properly to the degree of baron, but applied
also to the whole peerage, as in the expression "the house of lords." A TITLE OF OFFICE, as
lord mayor, lord commissioner, etc… (Black4)

!122
 LORD - noun - 1. A MASTER; a PERSON possessing supreme power and authority; A
RULER; A GOVERNOR. Man over man he made not lord. But now I was the lord of this fair
mansion. 2. A TYRANT; AN OPPRESSIVE RULER. 3. A HUSBAND. I oft in bitterness of
soul deplores my absent daughter, and my dearer lord. My lord also being old. Genesis 18:1. 4.
A baron; the proprietor of a manor; as the lord of the manor. 5. A NOBLEMAN; A TITLE OF
HONOR in Great Britain GIVEN TO THOSE WHO ARE NOBLE BY BIRTH OR
CREATION; a peer of the realm, including dukes, marquises, earls, viscounts and barons.
Archbishops and bishops also, as members of the house of lords, are lords of parliament.
Thus we say, lords temporal and spiritual. By courtesy also the title is given to the sons of
dukes and marquises, and to the eldest sons of earls. 6. AN HONORARY TITLE BESTOWED
ON CERTAIN OFFICIAL CHARACTERS; as lord advocate, lord chamberlain, lord
chancellor, lord chief justice, etc. 7. IN SCRIPTURE, THE SUPREME BEING; JEHOVAH.
When lord in the Old Testament, is printed in CAPITALS, it is the translation of JEHOVAH,
and so might, with more propriety, be rendered. THE WORD IS APPLIED TO CHRIST,
Psalms 110:1. Colossians 3:16. and to the Holy Spirit, 2 Thessalonians 3:1. AS A TITLE OF
RESPECT, IT IS APPLIED TO KINGS, Genesis 40:1. 2 Samuel 19:7. TO PRINCES AND
NOBLES, Gen 42. Daniel 4:19. to a husband, Genesis 18:1. to a prophet, 1 Kings 18:1. 2 Kings
2:1. and to a respectable person, Gen 24. Christ is CALLED the lord of glory, 1 Corinthians
2:8. AND LORD OF LORDS, Revelation 19:1. - verb transitive - To INVEST with the dignity
and PRIVILEGES of a lord - verb intransitive - To domineer; to rule with arbitrary or despotic
sway; sometimes followed by over, and sometimes by it, in the manner of a transitive verb.
The whiles she lordeth in licentious bliss. I see them lording it in London streets. They lorded
over them whom now they serve. (Webs1828)

—=—

If we shalt have no other gods before Jehovah, then why do we have so many damned lords?

The answer is not a difÞcult one. For the legal (anti-God/antichrist) title of ÒlordÓ is given just for
being born under the correct posterity of bloodline. It takes very little or nothing but chance to be
born as a lord in heirship or to be bestowed a lord-ship in fee (a feudal vessel of honor granted to
lesser gods). And so once again we Þnd that a lord is only our land-lord if we respect such a
ßattering title, which the scriptures and Word of God expressly tell us never to do. ItÕs all about
respect. And respect is all about choice. The gods (lords) only exist on paper. And only when we
contract with those paper gods are we bound to their entitled lordship, for we have contractually
entered their own falsely re-created realm, and so we have surely (expressly) taken (elected/
chosen) them before Jehovah.

And so I ask the reader again, what does the word ÒGodÓ and the words ÒJesus christÓ actually
mean in their True intention of scripture?

This is a trick question. For the word ÒGodÓ in its Highest, capitalized form means ÒJehovah.Ó And
the term ÒJesus christÓ in its Highest form simply means that ÒJehovah is salvation.Ó In other
words, Jesus christ is the personiÞcation of Jehovah, the messenger of the Word of Law. We cannot
separate these two concepts, for one is interrelated to and quite dependent upon the other. But we
also cannot elevate Jesus as Jehovah, for his namesake would then be dismissed as less High, and
salvation barred. As the Bible declares we must learn not to worship Jesus as Jehovah, but as the
exemplary, emulating path and Light back to Jehovah, back to the Reality and True Nature of all
that Exists without Þction. We are to act according to the example set out in the scriptures so as to
worship Nature and Its Law in all we do, all day, every day, not just at those times of the appointed
and falsely christened Roman calendar, on Sundays and holidays. Our work, our employments as
well must be in honor and worship of God's Nature and bound by Its Law, and no legal excuses
should be made to break with It. We must become christ-like as a lifestyle in consciousness and in
the permanence of our being, for no man can possibly be likened to God, as God is all of Existence
and Life in eternity while man is only a part of that Whole Oneness. We should seek not to become
Òthe OneÓ but to become One with All. For to be in tune with the Oneness that is the Nature of

!123
Jehovah, as that which we eternally are a Creation of (verb) whether we like it or not, we must stop
acting as if we are some other thing (noun) or in some other place (noun) we can never actually Be.
For in the end, these empty words, names, and titles will cause our True Selves to be driven to
Þnally destroy each other.

The difference here is a huge one. For while there is no title of Jehovah (the One True God)
bestowed upon any man, the ßattering title of ÒChristÓ (the anointed) is claimed and used
throughout the corporate church and state by many magistrates (pretended gods/idols). And so,
while the Þgurative blood (knowledge) of Jesus the christ may certainly, metaphorically ßow into
all men by their learned wisdom and works based on a spiritual Faith (Trust) in only the Truth of
Nature without artiÞce, the blood of kings and popes and other sovereign ÒPeopleÓ like George
WashingtonÕs brood is exclusive of all but those qualiÞed to bear such heraldic Arms through their
legally registered lineage. Christ’s teachings are damning of such fabled genealogies, supporting
the True Equality of all men not by some imagined ÒnobleÓ blood or societal legal status but
through a spiritual connection to God (Jehovah).

—=—

“But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off ARE MADE
NIGH BY THE BLOOD OF CHRIST.”
—Ephesians 2:13, KJB

—=—

“But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb WITHOUT

BLEMISH AND WITHOUT SPOT… BEING BORN AGAIN, NOT OF
CORRUPTIBLE SEED, BUT OF INCORRUPTIBLE, BY THE WORD OF
GOD, which liveth and abideth FOR EVER. For all ßesh is as grass, and
all the glory of man as the ßower of grass. THE GRASS WITHERETH,
AND THE FLOWER THEREOF FALLETH AWAY: BUT THE WORD OF
THE LORD ENDURETH FOR EVER. And this is the WORD which by
the gospel is preached unto you.”
—1 Peter 1:19 and 23-25, KJB

—=—

Never forget that these are the verses of poetry, of moral story-telling. For if Jesus christ was indeed
a man of only one single bloodline, as the antichrist popes and kings proclaim, then the Bible story
as a moral teaching of Natural Law would be pointless, excluding all but that line in fabled
genealogy. This would make the Bible not a religious, moral work, not a compendium of the
Natural Law, but something else entirely. And most obviously it would be hidden from the
common people and kept in that family. But God's Law of True Knowledge and self-Existence must
be publicized, and the common people must voluntarily reject it, judge it, and so be equally judged.
Of course, this genealogical fallacy is exactly why the church insists Jesus christ was a Real man in
its own Roman history, an existence that can somehow be artfully passed from one decrepit pope
and king to the next. But the scriptural teachings tell us that to know christ is simply a metaphor
meaning to have the knowledge of Truth and to follow the Law/Word of Truth without man's
artiÞces.

!124
The character of Jesus the christ is not meant to be taken as a racial entity or to be considered by his
ethnicity to any legal nation, not as black, brown, or white or some other color of the imaginations
of men. Christ is not a nationality, not an id-entity or legal person, though interestingly the name
Galilee (Galilaia) from Stongs #G1056 is translated to mean “circuit” or “district,” which held
Nazareth (Nazara) meaning “the guarded one,” from Strongs #G3478, in its jurisdiction.

Until the Þgurative Nature of christ is considered, there will always be a war between those more
interested in race and the wealth of nations (false gods) than Peace, Love, Charity, and Truth
between all men through christ’s example.

But instead of following christ as the Son (Word) and Highest Law of God, we follow the peerage
and third party legal law of purely corrupt men ranked by the fabled trees of their own history (his
story) of generationally “pure” bloodlines. Reasonably, there is nothing more ridiculous than this
custom, imagining that the totality of the father’s essence, integrity, honor, and knowledge can be
passed to the son via his blood alone. That false knowledge, empathy, and reason are somehow
inheritable traits is the purest of logical fallacies. We must consider that knowledge of Þction, of
lies, is not a Natural self-evident understanding and can only possibly be a learned trait. What is
passed on to each new generation is the very mysteries and language codes of this global organized
crime, all of which does not Exist in Reality. These “People” are the pirates responsible for the
pretended legal corruption of our own blood in their own corrupted system and purview, so that
we may not hold the same privileges as them nor bear our privacy in Arms nor be private holders
of any lands of our own, and so that we may be enslaved by their commercial designs of mammon
against the self-evident knowledge of GodÕs Word and Nature.

—=—

“And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries,
and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove
mountains, AND HAVE NOT CHARITY, I AM NOTHING.”
—1 Corinthians 13:2, KJB

—=—

“CHARITY NEVER FAILETH: but whether there be prophecies, they

shall fail; whether there be tongues (languages), they shall cease;
whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.”
—1 Corinthians 13:8, KJB

—=—

“Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have
knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, BUT CHARITY EDIFIETH.”
—1 Corinthians 8:1, KJB

—=—

Perhaps the reader is now beginning to comprehend the inseparable Nature of the Law and the
Bible. And perhaps the complete fraud that is organized, doctrinal religion is being seen here with
as much disdain as the public education system, both designed to take us away from such spiritual
knowledge, from our own heritage, our privacy, our family, our ability and prosperity, and from

!125
the power of GodÕs Law to protect us from such artiÞcial, legal designs against us. Perhaps the
notion of legally created and sanctioned ÒcharitiesÓ might now seem as ridiculous as thinking that
an artiÞcial intelligence can have Grace and morals, or commit actions in True spiritual Love,
despite its missing soul.

Quite simply, commerce and charity are not compatible terms. For the antonym of the word
commerce is unemployment, as in to not use another man or thing for proÞt and gain.

Perhaps these words God and Jesus christ are beginning to feel a lot more important than we gave it
false-credit for between football games and re-runs of American IDOL and sometimes on holiday
Sundays (legally cursed holy days). For the only True and Natural Freedom under God can only
come when we individually decide to have no other gods (lords) before the God of Nature, to hold
no lies as Higher than that Holy Host of what is the only Truth of Existence. That includes the god
of mammon and its tool of currency. Think about that for a moment and donÕt be shocked by the
absolute self-evidence of this statement. Live a lie or face Reality. For this is the only True Religious,
spiritual Life that can be led, and is the only One exempliÞed by christ, that we Live charitably and
at all times in self-Existent Truth.

But the legal gods have other designs, following the lines of their god- ÒfathersÓ though we are not
to call any man as Father, and appointing themselves to the highest of commercialism and
judgement.

PEERAGE - The rank or dignity of a peer or nobleman. Also THE BODY OF NOBLES
TAKEN COLLECTIVELY. (Black4)

PEERS - In feudal law. THE VASSALS OF A LORD WHO SAT IN HIS COURT AS JUDGES
OF THEIR CO-VASSALS, and were called "peers," as being each other's equals, or of the
same condition. The NOBILITY of Great Britain, BEING THE LORDS TEMPORAL having
seats in parliament, and including dukes, marquises, earls, viscounts, and barons. Equals;
those who are a man's equals IN RANK AND STATION; thus "trial by a jury of his peers"
means trial by jury of citizens. For "judgment of his peers," see Judgment. (Black4)

PEERS OF FEES - Vassals or tenants OF THE SAME LORD, WHO WERE OBLIGED TO
SERVE AND ATTEND HIM IN HIS COURTS, being equal in function. These were termed
"peers of fees," because holding fees of the lord, or because their business in court was TO
SIT AND JUDGE, UNDER THEIR LORDS, OF DISPUTES ARISING UPON FEES; but, if
there were too many in one lordship, the lord usually chose twelve, who had the title of peers,
by way of distinction; whence, it is said, WE DERIVE OUR COMMON JURIES and other
peers. (Black4)

—=—

These are only the legal gods appointed by other legal gods to judge the legal slaves that worship
them in legal name and title. It is merely an imaginary class structure, the several levels of lordship
(god-hood). And at the highest levels of government, in the legislature, the senators and house
members are their own peers, their ofÞcial actions subject only to their own Òethics committeesÓ
upon which they themselves preside, continuously pardoning their own collective and
individually organized crimes.

—=—

...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, BE
PRIVILEGED FROM ARREST during their attendance at the Session of
their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any

!126
 Speech or Debate in either House, THEY SHALL NOT BE
QUESTIONED IN ANY OTHER PLACE.”
—U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 6, Clause 1

—=—

It is very important to note here that this notion of legal (unnatural, anti-God) “equality” is what
allows all men in public persona to be judged by all other men in legal persona acting in juries and
as administrative judges at bar. Equality is just another patriotic lie used to cause all men to never
be spiritually considered. Only the Þction, the equal legal person (status) is considered. The man
follows suit in surety. All strawmen are equal in the eyes of the Þctional administrative law system.
And without the strawman (bond and surety) the man cannot be considered at all. No man should
seek to be bound in legal (forced) equality with all others. This is just slavery by another name, for
only slaves would seek such a status under a master.

Here we can see that even gods may be ruled over by other gods. These barons or land-lords are
only appointed as gods to judge in peerage by a higher god, a higher authority, as the majesty of a
king or queen, which is again merely a higher form of Þctional god-hood. All legal titles impose
upon the holder a sort of god-ship, a vessel, and the power of that ship (as with a citizen-ship) only
exists over those Þctional names and titles of artiÞcial persons, places, and things placed under its
jurisdiction by another god in its peerage. Even our modern juries are appointed to be temporary
gods over other “equal” citizen-ships (vessels), acting under the jurisdiction of their lord (judge)
though spiritually none of them should be casting stones in judgement, for none of us stand in
innocence. Notice above that a peer is an equal, just as citizens of the United States are in peerage
with each other under the “equal protection of the law.” Equal slaves. But notice also that this
equality is only applied to those peers by their appointed rank and station (false persona) in political
(artiÞcial) society. It is very important to know here that it is not any Living man that is being
considered as equal by these creator gods and lords of the legal law, only a Þctionally registered
and assigned persona (status) in legal society, which is a Þctionally named legal place (jurisdiction).
The surnames are equal, the titles are not. No title is bestowed to any man, only to his Þctional
persona.

And so a Muslim in citizen-ship is equal to a Christian in citizen-ship, and both are equal to an
atheist in citizen-ship. Why is this? As we will see, legal citizenship to the Þction, to that legal
government which is opposed to God and Nature, regards every public citizenship in abandon-
ment of God, as having no religious tendencies or Higher moral Law, and as having no private
religion. For his god is the legal state and he worships only publicly in mammon and in false
persona of the state, valuing everything he senses only in the artiÞcial estimation (judgement) and
valuation of money, including even his own Self, his labor, and so too his children. Be-lief in (love
of) money is certainly the root of all evil, for evil is only ever that which is artiÞcial. Money is only a
representation of debt, a promise to pay passed from hand to hand, and only debtors in surety
bond worship (believe in it) and therefore publicly use it.

To be clear, titles donÕt Exist in Nature, meaning they are not a Creation of the Supreme Being we
call as God, as the Creator of all of Nature and the Universe, and are instead only legal creations of
these legal gods. Man is not born in Nature with a name or title or number or mark. There is no
actual equality in Nature, and the sexes for instance are certainly not in any way equal in their
abilities and weaknesses. Equality is not a right in Reality, it is the voluntary and Highest duty of
all men to treat each other as such. The male has not the equal ability to bear children as the female,
and so this notion of equality can and only ever is a political, artiÞcial status of manÕs law. And as
we will uncover, equality is one of the worse aspects of citizen-ship, for even slaves are considered
as equal in their very limited rights. Legal words are generally opposed to their general and
spiritual meaning as terms of art, and so equality under manÕs law is merely a form of building a
lower class structure than the false creators (gods) of that legal Òequality.Ó These artiÞcial things

!127
such as legal rights and duties are only ever the creation of man. They are not of Nature. They do
not grow on trees. They do not just spontaneously happen. It is this distinction between the
Supreme Being which we call as “God” and Its Realm of Nature as compared to the false
supremacy of these legal gods by respect and consent of men that we must always consider. For
again, the law we voluntarily follow expresses the god we have chosen.

A man has but two states of being. One is as a man under God and one as that same man acting in
the Þctional persona under the legal gods. This is the scriptural choice between God and the god of
mammon. The gods of money are the gods of nations, for all internationally considered forms of
money are national in their origins. And so the gods of the nations, of the national currency and
commerce, are always only idols. And so the persons of men, as artiÞcial creations of these idols,
can also only ever be considered as re-created false-images when compared to man’s Origin and
Source in Nature (as the Creation of that Supreme God, the Creator of all of Nature and more
importantly, of man). It is the use by man in his adultery (false persona) of these legal gods
currencies and credit (as the creation and property of the nation), which is legally called as
“commerce,” that allows the creator of that money to be as gods over us. The user of another’s
property is only ever the subject of its actual owner. The user of another’s names (status) and titles
is only ever the subject of their creator. And every creation has a god (creator). An agent only ever
exists to serve its principal, a servant its master. Man’s use of only God’s Creation of Nature makes
man a subject only of God and thus of only the Natural (unwritten) Law. It is only the contracted
use and dis-ease of artiÞcial, legal persons, places, and things by their authoritative legal names
that man becomes the bonded subject of these idols of the nations, those re-creators as the gods of
their own Þction and artiÞce.

—=—

“Thou shalt make no covenant WITH THEM, NOR WITH THEIR

GODS. They shall not DWELL in thy land, LEST THEY MAKE THEE
SIN AGAINST ME: FOR IF THOU SERVE THEIR GODS, it will
SURELY be a SNARE unto thee.”
—Exodus 23: 32-33, KJB

—=—

These words have very distinct meanings, which will be further revealed as we proceed. But the
message here and our entrained ignorance of it is quite clear. For we have made covenant (contract)
with them and their gods through their word-trickery, even as we stand in surety to their snare
(person/status). And this is a great example of so many verses that fall upon ears that cannot hear
and eyes that cannot see. For when the words are understood in their original intention, this verse
carries a much deeper meaning. When we read them with an open mind and seek their True
meaning and intent, we Þnd that we must condemn our own ego before we may see that our love
(belief) of our legal id-entity and status it provides is the barrier to knowledge. For if we try to
justify our legal, Þctional person-hood and its system of anti-God law while at the same time
claiming christ-hood and Its Law as the Word (Son) of God, we must necessarily experience the full
effect of cognitive dissonance. We simply cannot have, in Reality, two masters, two gods, because
we cannot have and uphold at the same time two opposing laws.

Here, in this simple scriptural declaration, we Þnd the very essence of our own collective hell. The
entire purpose of the existence of the United States and its corporate franchise of national citizen-
ship is to serve the gods (creators) of that nation. It is a commercial (dead) existence only, performed
in the name of another that is and can only be opposed to the Supremacy of Jehovah. For a citizen-
ship carries with it a legal covenant not of the grace of God (de gracia), but in the service and
subjection of that which is opposed to God (de facto). It is to be in surety to a Þctional person, to be

!128
snared by man’s legal code. To be opposed to God means here to stand in opposition to the
protective Law of and over all of Nature. For the law of the man is only the law of his contracts
(covenants), and the false law can only be applied through false (legal) testament. In all the fables
ever told, the devil may only ever retain power over each individual man by his consent to that
devilÕs contract, to its series of words. In law, a ÒdevilÓ is deÞned as a man that is an evil genius
(species). And, not surprisingly, junior attorneys are also ofÞcially called as Òdevils,Ó under the
tutelage of “devilmasters” at bar. This is no joke, and as we will uncover, the terms devil and
devilmaster are actually the ßattering titles ofÞcially given by the Scottish Parliament to its resident
attorneys. And of course devil’s advocate (as an attorney) is certainly a common place term. But don’t
you go judging anyone just yet, for we must also realize that we too are acting as devil’s advocates,
as the agents (attorneys) over Þctional persons, and as puppet-masters of the stateÕs puppets. We
are not acting as our True Selves either. Judge not, want not.

For any man to reign over another man by Þctional name and title, one man must use the property
(name and title) of the other, which is a tacit or express agreement to abide by the law of the other.
The contract is the devil’s only actual tool, its only tie that may bind man’s voluntary choice and
make him sure (in surety) to support and operate in the legal matrix code of this big legal lie. The
renter is always the subject of he who owns perfect title to that which is rented. A public person is
incapable of perfection. And so the man who falls into that snare of a Þction of law (a person)
must obey the law of his master (owner), even if that law is against God’s Law, as the Law of
Nature. It is no longer a choice. The impersonation of a Godless character in Þction takes choice
away, for the man must follow the strict Þctional law (contract) of they that own that Þctional
character. The problem is that our entire culture has been repurposed so as to perpetrate this fraud
of commercial citizen-ship in mammon. This is accomplished especially through Òlegal marriageÓ
and birth certiÞcation, so that what is the worst, lowest possible status above that of involuntary
slavery is applied to every man through what appears to him as that which is an absolutely normal
custom in society. And because we are assured scripturally that all the gods of the nations are only
ever idols, man can only ever stand in idolatry under any national citizen-ship. No exceptions! This
legal entrapment has one and only one distinct purpose: to cause man into an alienation of his
“inalienable (sellable) rights” so that his family wealth and inheritance can be taken in legal piracy
by the law of the sea as treasure found by salvage. This is the master plan. And as strange as that
may sound, it is exactly what the legal dictionaries (court records) tell us is happening. So keep
reading, for this work is an encyclopedic dictionary exposing that master plan by these legalized
pirates in their own words, and we havenÕt even reached the Þrst chapter!

One very clear and agreed upon foundation must be set here, at the beginning. We must know and
understand that without a foundation, without an agreed upon Source (God/Creator), no structure
would be able to stand in its own self-existence, either physically, metaphorically, or as a legal
Þction. Only one Realm stands in self-evidence and self-Existence, and that is the Reality of Nature
that relies on nothing of man's imaginations or creations to Exist. To this Natural Realm we
attribute the Highest Word of ÒCreationÓ and the Highest Authority of Law possible, as the
ÒNatural Law.Ó And so we call this whole conceptualization of what is Pure and Real in the
Universe as God (Jehovah). Without this under-standing as our Highest foundation of Law, we
may claim no where else to go, no way out of Þction, for we have no words to describe Reality as
Jehovah to those lesser gods that seek to defeat the authority of that Natural Law of God, which is
well-accepted to be in all legal systems an uncontrollable, unwritten Act of God. In other words, if
you are their subject under their persona and law, and they very much recognize God's Law of
Nature as Highest, then whether you like it or not you accept this as True. If they consider it their
duty to entrap you in legal contract and law because you have fallen and chose to remain fallen
from the Grace and Natural Freedom and negative responsibility and duty of God, then you would
be quite a dumb-ass to claim differently while following their law. This is not merely some foolish
religious doctrine, this is the foundation of all systems of law. To ignore this fact is to publicly
pronounce what a fool you are, for your denial is literally a curse upon your True Self (Source), a
fortiÞcation of the chains that bind you to Þction. To publicly proclaim your non-belief (hate/non-
love) of God as ÒCreatorÓ of Life and all self-Existence is to publicly claim that Reality does not
Exist, and that Þction overrules the Law of Nature (Jehovah).

!129
And this state of confusion and helplessness is exactly where they wish you to say, bound by their
words of art, and worshiping all things unnatural.

And so we must here have a meeting of the minds before continuing with this work. Without this
under-standing as the very principle and foundation of all things and of the Þction laws that hold
all Real and artiÞcial things together, there is no point in your moving forward. And so, whether
we believe (love) or don’t believe in “God” and the many forms, images, and anthropomorphic
versions that are manifested to us by that multitude of legal and ecclesiastic institutions, books
(adversaria), and sacred (cursed) sites from all over the earth, we must here understand that the
entirety of all law is based in some way on “God,” either in support of God or as that which is
opposed to God. At the heart and foundation of all law and of all things, there sits some version,
form, and ßavor of what ÒGodÓ is. If the acknowledged god is Òsatan,Ó then that nevertheless
means that this “god” is the foundation of the satanic (adversarial) law and thus the structure of
that society. But we must remember that “satan” only exists as a concept against that which is the
Reality and Nature of “God.” Without God, satan would serve no purpose, for satan is only the
adversary of God. No God, no adversary. Darkness needs Light to shine so that it may cast its own
shadows, especially the Light of revelatory knowledge. And so we must know here that whatever
is considered as sovereign is merely “the god” or “gods” over any legally created law or legal
system of men. The gods of nations sit only in idolatry, for nations are only ever the artful creations
of man, not of God (not of the True binding Source of Nature). Be it a king or a speciÞc private
“People,” the sovereignty of any legally created entity, church or state, is acting as god (land-lord)
over whatever those men constitute (create) as their own realm of Þction. Acceptance of their
artiÞcial, legal existence is acceptance of their personal god-hood. To fear them is to respect them.

For example, let us consider every one of the several State constitutions, which are all similarly
worded. Every state constitution stems from one and only one Source - the authority of some name
or description of the Highest God. This cannot be denied, for it is written plainly and clearly. Every
single State Constitution begins with a similar religious preamble, such as:

“We, the people of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty, in order
to secure the advantages of a state government, do ordain and establish this constitution…”

—New Mexico State Constitution

—=—

This invocation of God cannot be overlooked as just some ßight of fancy or sense of mere
romanticism. It is not an invocation of any of manÕs incorporated ÒreligionsÓ or doctrines, but
serves only as an acknowledgement of the Source of man and Creation of all Nature. This
enforcement of God as Creator of Nature and of manÕs place (liberty) within It, as well as that
“Higher Law” standing over all of what we call “Creation,” is a necessary ingredient to any
tyranny created by men; those usurpers of God’s name for their own adversarial purpose and gain
in mammon. For this is the establishment of the Highest Law (of God), and what follows is the
ordination of the lower law (of Þction). In other words, by establishing the Highest Law those who
join such an unholy “State” (People) in that commercial estate and territory (land) are choosing to
abandon that which is stated in the preamble as the Highest Law of God. These constitutions are
god-makers, admissions and publications of sin, abandonments of the Highest God and Its Law of
Nature. The men claiming sovereignty over all others may only do so by invoking God’s name to
justify their supposed legal existence in and as a secondary creator of art; a legalistic sovereignty.
And this is why we are not only instructed but commanded to respect and take no other gods
before the One and Only God of Nature. From Rome to America, this aspect is seen throughout all
historical empires, and, not ironically, is also seen as the cause and foundation of each empire’s
devolution into apathy in its ultimate and cyclic demise, as each State (People) devolves from that
pretended, sacred and aristocratic Source and foundation of a Higher, Natural Law. Quite simply,
man’s creation of lower (legalistic) law hinges on his ability to convince or fool another into

!130
allowing them to play god and thus create law over his own legal creation of empire. A master must
have his subjects, or his title is meaningless and his foundation (artful source) will fail.

And so we take comfort that no matter what damage man may do to his own Realm of Nature and
place within it, that foundation of Jehovah, of God’s Creation and Its permanent Law shall never
die. Without man, Nature will continue and thrive. But without Nature, man cannot survive. Thus
the obvious and self-evident Law that all men must follow to ensure their survival is the Law of
Nature, the Law of Creation, which without hesitation necessarily condemns all other forms of law
and the false gods in ßattering title that created them. Here we may see the paradox of a US public
citizen-ship or member of any legal government or nation impossibly claiming as well to be a
follower of christ (the Highest Law of Nature). Christians existing happily in hellÉ It is a delicious
irony, for such false knowledge of the gods of Þction can only be attributed to the brainwashing of
public education and an absolute obfuscation of the knowledge of the ancient scriptures (the True
Law). For only the manifestation of christ (Law) in all men may defeat such a devilish deceit, as no
other law would be needed or permitted.

Here in the United States we are witnessing a private bloodline of ÒPeopleÓ declaring themselves
as a pluralistic (‘elohiym) god over all public persons, including corporations. And these many gods
called as the several (private) ÒStatesÓ created the god known as ÒWe, the People.Ó When we as
subjects of this god Òthe PeopleÓ receive a summons to appear in an administrative court, it comes
from none other than that legally established and ordained god named as Òthe PeopleÓ of whatever
state of the nation is summoning its own property (written as the People of State vs. a legal person).
And the man (pledge) as acting agent for that public persona (property) must appear as summoned
when that strawman is called forth by the god (judge) that is the representative administrator-ship
of Òthe People.Ó

Amazingly, this can only mean that we, the common citizenships, are certainly not Òthe PeopleÓ of
any private State of the Union. To be able to be summoned by that artiÞcial god is to be owned by
that god. And so, unless we can differentiate and mentally separate our True Self from these
Þctional re-presentations of that simulation of self (a legal persona), we cannot even begin to
comprehend how or why we have taken an idolatrous god before the Supreme God of all Nature.
ÒThe PeopleÓ (a false god) is only administering its own commercial property as its subject, its
strawman; as its proprietary legal names and titles. It is the god of ÒClint Richardson,Ó but not the
God of (Creator of) me.

In this respect, and in order to establish the very foundation of the Highest Sovereign Authority of
God’s Natural Law above all other potential legal state and church gods and their lesser, unnatural
laws, even they must have Þrst acknowledged a One True God. This is not a requirement of belief
in some re-presented image or person as ÒGod,Ó only an understanding that all law stems from the
concept of the ultimate power and authority of God as Creator, whether you personally believe in
(love) God or not. God is the foundational escape route and safe-house. Some call this as getting
back to Nature. Others call it getting Ògrounded.Ó Some smoke Its weeds and ingest Its shrooms.
Whatever the name, the result is the same: oneÕs re-Þnding of what is Real. The reader may choose
to ignore this fact at his own peril, and purposeful ignorance and even unreasonable hatred of this
fact is a likely sign that that reader will not be able to get anything from this work. For I cannot nor
do I intend to prove to anyone that God Exists. The point of GodÕs Realm is that everything in It is
not provable, for Self-Existence is self-evident, requiring no Þctional proofs of mens imaginations
or words. It is difÞcult I know to have such Faith, but only until you realize that Faith in Truth, in
Reality, and in Nature is just another way of stating the words Faith in God. The author is not
asking the reader to believe (love) anything that isn’t Real, only to acknowledge the foundational
law of men in their nationhood by their own creations and writings. I ask only that you believe in
(love) only Reality, which is the meaning of the word Jehovah, which is the Highest and only Pure
use of the word ÒGodÓ in the English Bible. In other words, man only obtains power as a false
authority by pretending to be middleman gods, in the appointed ofÞces of what they deÞne as
ÒGod,Ó pretendedly and apparently approved and thus seated in ofÞce by that Supreme Being.
Thus we must only know that from the point of view of any legal system of law created by man,

!131
that law is only established and ordained over man’s own false creation of legal names and titles
(nouns) of all things already in Existence (of God’s Creation). Nature (including all men on earth in
equal consideration) must Þrst be acknowledged as only the unimpeachable Creation of God and
no other, with no ßattering titles, before a false god pretending to be a deity higher than man but
less than Jehovah and in legal reconsideration of all Nature appoints himself or is anointed
(christened) to be sovereign over manÕs legal creation and law and those who volunteer to be under
its sovereignty. The establishment of the Highest God in the mind is the ratiÞcation of choice.

If the reader has ever quoted the statement that “all men are created equal,” he has only quoted a
part of GodÕs Law plagiarized by an idolatrous nation to justify their tyrannical designs and false
law against he who religiously quotes it. These statements are a statement of Source, of man’s
origin and permanent place in GodÕs Creation of Nature. Man retains this station in GodÕs
Kingdom at all times, for he can never in Truth be anything but what God Created him as. Only if
he follows by his choice of actions in life that Natural Law of God without using manÕs legal
artiÞces of legal names, titles, credit, and insurances (being in surety) can he actually lay claim to be
under that Higher Law of God, for what is Nature without a Creator? To deny God is to deny
Reality, not because God exists in some perceived form or image, but because another name for
Reality is Jehovah (God).

REALITY - noun - 1. ACTUAL BEING OR EXISTENCE OF ANY THING; truth; fact; IN

DISTINCTION FROM MERE APPEARANCE. 2. Something intrinsically important, not
merely matter of show. And to realities yield all her shows. 3. In the schools, THAT MAY
EXIST OF ITSELF, or which has A FULL AND ABSOLUTE BEING OF ITSELF, AND IS
NOT CONSIDERED AS A PART OF ANY THING ELSE. 4. IN LAW, IMMOBILITY, or THE
FIXED, PERMANENT NATURE OF PROPERTY; AS CHATTELS WHICH SAVOR OF THE
REALITY [This word is so written in law, for reality]. (Webs1828)

—=—

Notice that to a Þctional person created as a Þction of law, the only pretended reality is the legal
artiÞce of property. Remember also that property is never that which a public person holds, but
only that which he uses under the private holder of that property, including land. In other words,
in the legal realm, the only reality is a virtual one, the registered forms of all things without
substance. And property is merely a construct of the words of art of that legal system. Property is
not Real, just as real estate is not a part of Reality (Jehovah). A claim on land is not actual land, just a
false, ßattering title of that Real land (Creation). And therefore we must know that all wars are not
fought over actual land, but over the power to call that land as legally entitled sovereign
Òproperty.Ó Real men must die just so that the gods of nations may transfer title and commercially
exploit the Real land to re-source Its mineral riches. What could be more opposed to the moral
conduct of a people (church) of christ? What could be further from the Truth of what is the Natural
Law?

Before continuing upon this journey, let us take into consideration this word ÒtruthÓ in its dualistic
and opposing forms. What is True under God is that which is self-evident, needing no proof from
the designs of men. What is called as the noun or name of ÒtruthÓ in the legal system is always a
lie, for words and names are always an accepted lie. Truth, like Life, is a verb. It is an action. Truth
happens as it happens, timelessly and without history. Whatever name (noun) is placed upon Truth
has nothing to do with Its actuality (self-Existence) and self-evidence. In fact, a name re-creates as a
dead instrument the animate substance of Life, as the verb of Being or action thereof, into an empty
form with no self-evidence or self-Existence. Art cannot animate itself. In other words, only the
name artfully afÞxed to something Real may be proven to Þctionally exist by artiÞcial law, but
never a man or other part of GodÕs Creation alone (without name), which we may call ambiguously
as Nature or as Reality. That being said, let us consider what the Pure Truth is compared to Its evil
twin, that imagined legal or linguistic truth made entirely of words with no substance.

!132
 —=—

“I shall then suppose, not that God who is supremely good and THE
FOUNTAIN OF TRUTH, but some EVIL GENIUS not less powerful
than deceitful, has employed his whole energies in deceiving me; I shall
consider that the heavens, the earth, colours, Þgures, sound, and all
other external things are nought but the illusions and dreams of which
this genius has availed himself IN ORDER TO LAY TRAPS FOR MY
CREDULITY; I shall consider myself as having no hands, no eyes, no
ßesh, no blood, nor any senses, yet falsely believing myself to possess
all these things; I shall remain obstinately attached to this idea, and if
by this means it is not in my power to arrive at the knowledge of any
truth, I MAY AT LEAST DO WHAT IS IN MY POWER AND WITH
FIRM PURPOSE AVOID GIVING CREDENCE TO ANY FALSE
THING, OR BEING IMPOSED UPON BY THIS ARCH DECEIVER,
HOWEVER POWERFUL AND DECEPTIVE HE MAY BE.”

“WHERE COULD AN EFFECT GET ITS REALITY, IF NOT FROM ITS

CAUSE? …If we assume that something is found in the idea that was
not in its cause, THEN THE IDEA GETS THAT SOMETHING FROM
NOTHING…”

“Perhaps several partial causes… have taken the ideas of various

perfections I attribute to God from a variety of causes, so that all of
these perfections are found somewhere in the universe, BUT NOT ALL
JOINED TOGETHER IN A SINGLE BEING—GOD.  On the contrary,
THE UNITY, THE SIMPLICITY, that is, THE INSEPARABILITY OF
ALL THOSE FEATURES THAT ARE IN GOD IS ONE OF THE CHIEF
PERFECTIONS THAT I UNDERSTAND TO BE IN HIM”.”
—Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy (separate quotes)

—=—

One of Descartes premises about the “human condition” was that while man's will is unlimited,
and so too therefore is his ability to choose correctly or incorrectly, his reason and perception are
in fact quite limited. For, of course, man cannot know the completeness of God (the Universe) nor
comprehend Its Greatness. But he can certainly create languages and digits that become his own
false religions and his sciences, where the symbols overshadow and become more sacred than that
singular aspect of the Oneness of God (Creation) they represent as Þction. Thus man has been led
to worship the effect but not the cause (Source) of the effect. And so we Þnd that manÕs sacred
designs can and only ever will be cursed, adding greatly to his knowledge of the fruit of evil
(artiÞce) without actual knowledge of the Real (good) such symbols represent. Even our concepts
of good and evil are skewed, mistaking again the actions of a spider as anthropomorphized evil.
But the spider is an integral part of Nature, not a artiÞcial creation of man. Thus the spider is not

!133
part of that tree of knowledge, for that tree only bears false or incomplete fruit. It bears only the
fruit of manÕs limitation of knowledge and perception. And so we must eat of it without conÞdence
at all times, for all that is sure (Truth) in Nature needs not the fruit of man’s ideas to justify Its self-
Existence. The effect of the fruit must never overshadow the cause of It, for Its power relies on Its
respected Source, and the law that binds It mustnÕt be confused with the law that Þctionalizes It to
be some thing it is not.

Descartes reached a Þnal conclusion, which we should all be taking to heart. He realized that
because of these limitations upon our perceptions but not upon our will and desires, we should
continuously, consciously assess all that we perceive with our senses. For our limitations cause us
to be susceptible to false perceptions, outright inaccuracies, and even well-known lies. Thus our
errors in believing (loving) such false perceptions and lies is not God’s fault but our own. We
cannot use God as an excuse for our own behavior (though many do), for our behavior stems from
our own perceptions, be they of falsity or of Truth. The Bible was written to reign in such false
perceptions, guiding us to embrace only that which is self-evident and self-Existent. And so
DescartesÕ Þnal solution was simply to consciously use our faculties correctly, with conscious
awareness of our limitations and ability to err, believing (loving) only that which is Real (of God).
And so the moral of his writings was quite reasonable, putting forward the simple concept that to
avoid error, each of us must consciously remain within the limits of what we can be certain about,
never assenting to artiÞcial concepts, sciences, and symbology that surpasses the limited powers of
our ability to perceive and avoid that for which our reasoning of what is self-evident is unable to
conÞrm. When in doubt, do not believe. Do not fall into false love with what is not Real.

Funny thingÉ this is exactly what the Bible teaches! The Þrst step is to admit to our own potential
for fallibility (sin, love of Þctional things), and then only from this point may we Þnd Truth (God).
But we must also realize that our belief in the supposed ÒinfallibilityÓ of the corporate,
ecclesiastical ofÞce of ÒPopeÓ or any other leader is part of our fallibility of perception. It is the
belief in (love of) what is not certainly of God’s Nature.

This work is intended to present one and only one thing, the self-evident Truth. While the rhetoric
of the author may sometimes get in the way of this momentous feat, such blathering is only
presented with that same intent of revealing and attempting to acknowledge and Live only in the
Highest Truth, as what is indisputable except through lies and deception. This work has no other
purpose. We must therefore acknowledge this very important collective condition of our place in
the corporate hu-man farm (colony) and under these devils (evil geniuses), that form without
substance we all suffer from at some point in our Lives, and perhaps on a daily basis. We seem to
enjoy or at least tolerate the task of hiding from the Truth and making up our own. We like to play
make-believe. We pre-tend. We lie to ourselves and do so quite often, either knowingly or un-
knowingly. And there is a very good reasoning behind this phenomenon, and not just in the fact
that everything around us exists as an accepted lie. Often, the Purest of Truths told by men appear
to the hearer as that which is offensive, causing hurt feelings due to the sudden cognition of some
very hard Realities (Truths) without dissonance, which ultimately we all know, in the end, cannot
be escaped from. We cannot escape from Nature, from Jehovah, from our Source in Nature, even
within these artiÞcial wombs (matrixes) we artfully create and believe in. What is out of harmony
with Reality will eventually be forced back in tune with It, or shall perish in the wake of that re-
tuning. Such artiÞcial growth away from the harmony of GodÕs Nature and Its Law of Life is
cancerous growth, and cancer is the bodyÕs forced evolution as a response to manÕs scientiÞc
designs against it, a desperate attempt to Þght our foolish rejections of the perfection of a Pure
Existence and Law. The Reality of It is self-evident with every blade of grass and every rainstorm
and every starry night. The strange question we must attempt to answer here is this: why is that
which is the unchangeable, undeniable, self-evident Truth such a perceptively offensive concept?
How can we possibly be offended by the True Nature of every aspect of our own Existence?

But the answer is even stranger. For we must realize that Truth in Its self-evident substance is in
actuality never offensive, and thus always defensive. They say the Truth hurts, but in Reality, it
can only heal. This is to say that the Truth can only be offensive to a liar, to anyone that believes

!134
they are some thing they are not. The Truth, being self-evident, is God’s primary defense against all
artiÞce and against the principality and princes (magistrates) of legal lies. It is the only True defense
that Exists, for only the Truth may defeat lies. And so no matter what is presented herein, the
author wishes only for the reader to ask this single question before rendering a Þctional opinion
based on some personal prejudice in artiÞce: Is what is written here a self-evident Truth, or is it a
falsiÞed or opinion of ÒtruthÓ based on a legally accepted lie, a lie with no Existence in Truth
(Reality)? Is it man-made or is It a Creation of GodÕs Nature? These are the only states of being
when it comes to information. Knowledge is either Real or artiÞcial, and we more so than not
acknowledge strictly what beneÞts our individual purpose and intent. Whatever is said herein is in
the Purest intent of Truth. Whatever the reader may extract from these words should be of the same
intent, for the Truth is only offensive to that which is not Real. To defend a state, a nation, a
corporation, a religion, a status within any of these, or any other Þctional creation of man is to deny
the Truth that these things simply do not Exist in self-evidence. They are not the Creation of God.
They did not grow on trees nor germinate from seed nor spawn from another Life. They are
imaginations of the magi in the nations. They are magic spellings of words. They are artiÞcial in
every way. And so please consider these differences when suddenly something written in this work
apparently offends you. The Truth may only offend he who hides behind a lie he calls as ÒtruthÓ
but is only the Þction of art, an image with no essence. Whatever painting you have created for
your legal self, whatever self-projected image you imagine yourself to be in their legal Þction, none
of these are self-evident Truths, only names and ßattering titles that exist only in Þction. And
anything True is always offensive to anything legal and artiÞcial.

Does the ÒtruthÓ in manÕs mind and imagination necessarily match or Exist what Is in Being, as
Reality? No, for a truth built of words or ideas cannot Exist in and of its self. It is never self-evident.
ManÕs accepted truths are only a product of manÕs imagined perceptions of the already Self-Existent
Reality (God), and so any truth created by man must never be said to be a certainty, especially the
theories of any science or religion. Numbers are words, and words are always a lie, standing as
only a two-dimensional, Þctional re-presentation of the inÞnitely dimensional Real they represent.
Certainties are neither scientiÞc nor spiritual. The only True and self-evident certainty is that God
(Reality) Exists despite manÕs opinions, beliefs, worded descriptions, names (nouns) and false
truths applied to It. So, while Reality is certain even as it constantly changes, Þction is Þxed in a
temporary state of nothingness. Simulation is never the Real, no matter how Real it seems. This is
one of the easiest foundations of Natural Law imaginable. And it is these weaknesses and logical
fallacies of manÕs perceptions that are manipulated by the Þctional church and state and so used to
enslave us all outside of conscious Reality, separating us from the Truth of our own Source.

A man without Real Land can only walk in false persona (legal status) on the artiÞcially titled
ÒlandÓ (real estate) of anotherÕs property. This legal word real in legal Þction has nothing to do with
what is actual or Real (of GodÕs Creation). Note here that this word Creation should also be read
throughout this work as an indisputable or self-evident concept, as the superlative (Highest) verb,
as the continuing or eternal action and Nature of the ever-changing permanence of the Universe.
This real estate is just words on paper. A false title. A numbered address point upon the grid of a
legal matrix used for service of process to the agents of Þctional persons. A lie given legal status is
therefore a conÞrmed and ratiÞed legal truth. And the only way that a man can walk without
touching his Source is to acknowledge in his mind and through legal contract that all of the True,
self-evident Land (Terra), as the Reality of the Creation of God, is instead and legally in truth
usurped and replaced by the legal paper creation under legally (Þctionally) appointed titles of
those legal gods of the nations.

—=—

“This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulÞl the lust of the
ßeshÉ IF YE BE LED OF THE SPIRIT, YE ARE NOT UNDER THE
LAWÉ the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering (patience),

!135
 gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: AGAINST SUCH
THERE IS NO LAW.”
—Galatians 5:16, 18, 22-23

—=—

“He is the Rock, his work is perfect: FOR ALL HIS WAYS ARE
JUDGMENT: A GOD OF TRUTH AND WITHOUT INIQUITY, just and
right is he.”
—Deuteronomy 32:4, KJB

—=—

“Now therefore fear the LORD, and serve him IN SINCERITY AND IN
TRUTH: and PUT AWAY THE GODS WHICH YOUR FATHERS
SERVED on the other side of the ßood, and in Egypt; and serve ye the
LORD.”
—Joshua 24:14, KJB

—=—

“…and the truth shall make you free.”

Honestly, how many have quoted this statement and yet have never known it to be plagiarized
from scripture. And how many still could have imagined that to be set Free by Living only in self-
evident Truth without artiÞce and false beliefs in the legitimacy and authorities of manÕs Þction and
law is for all intents and purposes the Whole of the Law (Word) of God? How many then
understand that the only defense (Truth) against their great and powerful legal system of lies is that
which against there is and can be no law, as Love, Charity, Goodness, Gentleness, Peace…

To a legal problem there is no Real solution. Fiction can never be solved or defeated with more lies
from that Þction. It is a closed loop system, as all lies are, which can only be defeated by the
unblemished Truth. One either is or is not acting as a Real man. One is either acting in surety of a
person or one is not. One either uses the name, number, and mark of a beast of burden or one does
not. One either quits lying or one remains bound by the relentless tentacles of that lie. No amount
of legal paperwork will Þx the problem, for the problem is the words of Þction within that legal
paperwork. The person is built upon those words of legal paperwork. The only Truth is that a legal
person cannot operate itself, any more than a cartoon may appear without a magic screen. We must
make this choice, each of us, to either empower or extinguish the life force and energy that powers
the lie. Without me, without the I Am, the person of Clint Richardson is dead.

To be vulgar and borrow a familiar phrase from so many false, institutionalized corporate
“Christians,” Living in Truth at all times is quite simply what Jesus would do! For christÕs only
defense was at all times the use of Pure Truth, and only the enemies of Pure Truth were offended by
Its delivery, as the scribes and Pharisees and money-changers and priests, the words of It stinging
like the most ferocious, strongest predator imaginable. As with the story of christ, the only way to
defeat the Truth is to imaginarily destroy It, either with strong hands or more aptly with stronger
words. And so, as the Bible instructs, we should not attempt to justify our sins, our crimes against
Nature and Its Law, by claiming they are legal or lawful. Spirituality and Creation Lives nowhere
under man's law.

!136
To walk spiritually is to walk against man’s false law and false creations, for no law can touch the
spiritually Living man. Pure Charity, as we have discussed, is an act of Pure spirit, and against the
spirit there is no legal law. It is only the Þctional personiÞcation of legalized Òcharity,Ó including all
corporations calling themselves as religions and churches, that the law of man may infect such
spiritual gifts. Intent is everything, and intent to receive some proÞt or gain by oneÕs act of giving is
the gateway sin, for to be sure of receipt one must obtain insurance, and insurance may only be
applied to the legal surname or title of a Þctional persona. Only in the ÒchristianÓ or Þrst (Source)
private name may man cause the Purity of Love and Charity to be fulÞlled. All else is of mammon,
and mammon is administered by false gods and tyrants.

Now, as stated at the beginning of this work, the Truth is an equal opportunity offender, and
therefore so might this work be to those lying continuously to themselves. And since we know now
that man's ÒreligionsÓ are all false, and that following GodÕs Law religiously is to Live in Truth, we
must also examine those groups and organizations that have developed mostly or solely in
opposition to organized corporate religion. We must uncover their crimes and artiÞces against man,
remembering that because anyone is driven to hate the church and denominated religions, the side-
effect is most often a hatred (ignorance) of the Bible and other scriptural-based knowledge.

Atheism, being the non-belief in the Existence of God, need not even be discussed here further than
this very fallacious, mixed-up deÞnition. For as we shall see, the word Jehovah (God) as
transliterated from the Bible is the very deÞnition of ÒExistenceÓ Itself. To not believe in (love) God
is to not believe in (love) Existence, which resultantly is not to believe in (love) one's own place in
that Existence. As it is based almost exclusively on the mistranslation of the word God, in never
deÞning the word and its intention, this atheistic belief system deserves no more attention here. It
is just silly that anyone Living and Breathing with the ability to reason would doubt the existence
of Existence (God), almost as silly as a ÒChristianÓ can be made to believe by man's false religions
and entertainments that God is somehow the form of a man in the sky sitting on a cloud. God's
Nature is simply not and never has been deÞned this way in the Bible. There are no gates made of
pearls in the Bible, except that the word pearl (margaritēs) is a metaphor for the sacred gospel
knowledge, as Òpearls of wisdom.Ó There is no actual cloud, only the metaphoric meaning of that
word cloud (anan) carrying the meaning of to veil or cover. These and other countless examples are
why the undeniable, self-evident, self-Existent Truth of what Jehovah (God) Is, as Life and all
things in Existence and Being (verb), can be arrogantly dismissed by the illiterate man.

Of course, I know of no self-proclaimed atheist that does not believe in (love) Reality, in Existence,
in Nature, and especially in his or her Self. This is just a public-minded mis-under-standing of the
meaning of the word God (Jehovah), and a stubborn, socially promoted refusal to learn. ItÕs a
modern, vulgar, popular opinion. But it is also steeped in the mysticism of Kabbalah:

—=—

“The true NAME of Satan, the Cabalists say, is that of YAHVEH

REVERSED; for Satan is not a black god, but THE NEGATION OF
GOD. THE DEVIL IS THE PERSONIFICATION OF ATHEISM OR
IDOLATRY. For the Initiates, this is not a Person, BUT A FORCE,
created for good, but WHICH MAY SERVE FOR EVIL. It is the
instrument of Liberty for Free Will.”
—Albert Pike, ‘Morals and Dogma,’ Page 102

—=—

!137
 —=—

“May the Force be with you…”

—Line from Star Wars, a proverb spoken universally by Jedi on both the light and dark side

—=—

As christ is the personiÞcation of GodÕs Light and Word (Law), so too is the devil indicative of the
personiÞcation of LuciferÕs false light and Lawlessness (anarchy against Jehovah), the negation of
foundation and grounding in Nature, as the improper use of that spiritual gift of free will. The
masters of knowledge must eventually choose their path into the Light or dark side, while all the
public-minded multitude succumbs to the false liberty of the false, political freedom and commerce
of the nations. And you thought it was just science Þction! Hollywood is the main foundation of the
dispensation of the darkest of magic and sigils of the dark side. And it is Hollywood that delivers
to us the false seers and evangelists, the preachers on television that love money more than the
Truth and Life itselfÉ

DISPENSATION - noun - [Latin. See Dispense.] 1. Distribution; the act of dealing out to
different persons or places; as the dispensation of water indifferently to all parts of the earth.
2. The dealing of God to his creatures; THE DISTRIBUTION OF GOOD AND EVIL,
NATURAL OR MORAL, IN THE DIVINE GOVERNMENT. Neither are GodÕs methods or
intentions different in his dispensations to each private man. 3. THE GRANTING OF A
LICENSE, OR THE LICENSE ITSELF, TO DO WHAT IS FORBIDDEN BY LAWS OR
CANONS, OR TO OMIT SOMETHING WHICH IS COMMANDED; that is, the dispensing
with a law or canon, or the EXEMPTION of a particular PERSON from the obligation to
comply with its injunctions. THE POPE HAS POWER TO DISPENSE WITH THE
CANONS OF THE CHURCH, but has no right to grant dispensations to the injury of a third
personÉ4. That which is dispensed or bestowed; A SYSTEM OF PRINCIPLES AND RITES
ENJOINED; as the Mosaic dispensation; the gospel dispensation; including, the former the
Levitical law and rites; the latter the SCHEME of redemption by Christ. (Webs1828)

—=—

To he that seeks Truth, and thus for he who Þnally arrives at the right question, it is not that
Jehovah Exists, it is that Jehovah is a word that means the entirety of All Existence as the Oneness
of God (monotheism). Without Jehovah (without Existence), no men would Exist to contemplate
such darkness of oblivion and negation, and therefore weÕd have no one left that Exists to label
themselves as an ÒatheistÓ or a ÒChristian.Ó And so we Þnd that the self-proclaimed ÒatheistÓ is
merely another non sequitur, a victim of church and state marked by the ßattering title of a fool,
formed through a purposefully induced public-minded ignorance of words through false
education and intentional obfuscation of the scriptural teachings. And all this because one little but
absolutely foundational word remains undeÞned to the mind. To argue and debate over a word
that has not been deÞned to have a known foundational (principle) meaning is the epitome of hu-
man sophistry. It leads, of course, to a superÞcial philo-sophy, to a preponderance of the Force and
thus Law of Life without attribution to a foundational Source. It is the lowest form of logic without
grammar. Sophistry is generally the foundation behind the use and respect of most, or perhaps
even all ßattering titles, especially those of the arts.

—=—

“True religion and True philosophy must ultimately arrive at the same
principle.”
ÑWebsters 1828 Dictionary, from deÞnition of Ôphilosophy.Õ (Webs1828)

—=—

!138
In other words, the Truth will be revealed to those who are not clouded by Pure intent, so that the
unhindered philosopher may discover what is self-Evident and self-Existent without such a source
as the Bible. This regards the True Light of God, that True knowledge is indefatigable and
achievable to all men. But the darkness of wisdom in the arts shall always cloud the senses of the
most pious of religious men and the most sincere philosophical thinkers equally. For the design of
darkness is to elude and cover up the Light, to cause what is the only Real Truth to be ritualistically
unseen and perceived as impractical through such practical magic of the dark arts.

Unfortunately, the dark side is always the easiest route to follow, ease being a component part of
the deadly sins. It is so very easy to fall into the trappings of the fool or of the devilmaster that
speaks with such sophistication, for we may not realize that such a sophistication is merely the
similitude of the hypnotic gaze of a serpent before its prey is stunned and slowly devoured. And of
course we goyim know best that no class is so sophisticated as that which the elite portend to be in
their politics and religious rites…

SOPHISTRY - noun - 1. FALLACIOUS REASONING; reasoning SOUND IN APPEARANCE

ONLY. These men have obscured and confounded the NATURE of things by their false
principles and wretched sophistry. 2. EXERCISE IN LOGIC. (Webs1828)

SOPHISTICATE - verb transitive - 1. TO ADULTERATE; TO CORRUPT BY SOMETHING

SPURIOUS OR FOREIGN; TO PERVERT; as, TO SOPHISTICATE NATURE,
PHILOSOPHY OR THE UNDERSTANDING. 2. To adulterate; to RENDER spurious; as
merchandise; as, to sophisticate wares or liquors. They purchase but sophisticated ware.
(Webs1828)

SOPHISTICATED - adjective - ADULTERATED; NOT PURE; NOT GENUINE. So truth,

when only one supplied the state, grew scarce and dear, and hey sophisticate. (Webs1828)

SOPHISTICATOR - noun - One that adulterates; ONE WHO INJURES THE PURITY AND
GENUINENESS OF ANY THING BY FOREIGN ADMIXTURE. (Webs1828)

SOPHISTICATION - noun - The act of adulterating; A COUNTERFEITING OR DEBASING

THE PURITY OF SOME THING BE A FOREIGN ADMIXTURE; adulteration. (Webs1828)

—=—

As we shall dis-cover in triplicate throughout this work, the entire purpose of national citizen-ship,
the legal admixture of the legal surname to the Pure christian name, is to corrupt (attaint) that
Purity of blood and innocence of every man, to adulterate us all from our Source of Nature, of Law,
and of True understanding. The more we allow ourselves to be “civilized” into the sophistication of
these legal societies under the laws of the idolatrous gods of nations, no matter how successful and
wealthy or how crude and impoverished that class-status may become, the more we lose our
spiritual Nature and consciousness. For all the gods of the nations are sophisticators (adulterators).

And so here and now this atheistic conceptualization of what “God” Is and Is Not should stand as
a quite sophisticated mistake corrected. But while atheism is the most obvious of these opposition
movements, let us discuss brießy here what is ßatteringly titled as the anarchist movement instead,
knowing that atheism is not the same concept. Atheism can at least be vulgarly understood as the
mistaken identity of the word “God” brought about by purely logical fallacy, bad grammar, and an
increase of promoted satanic propaganda, entertainment, and adversaria. It takes little effort to be
atheist, merely a partaking in the institutional, purposeful ignorance of the self-evident Truth and
of the due diligence to obtain that perspective of Truth, surrogated by a love for modern, sophist
society and its legal Þctions, employments, and pursuits in mammon. Modern, public education
and entertainments see quite well to this task of dis-education.

!139
The expression of anarchy is, however, not so simple to expose or to excuse, being a purposeful and
strangely existential Self-deceit. For this term of art “anarchist” in its application can only ever be a
ßattering title without any substance, as an actual state of anarchy would make the title useless. If
an arsonist burns the world to the point where there is nothing left to burn, then what use is his
title? If anarchy (lawlessness) is achieved, what is left for the anarchist to then promote, and what
law will be left to protect his ability to speak freely unless he organize for himself some governing
force or gang to protect himself and others from all other lawless men? While the follower of christ
must constantly seek and Þght that the higher Law of Nature must be followed in one's own duty
to God and to all men, the false title of political and practical “anarchist” dies the second that
system of law is destroyed. For once its only purpose is achieved, it apparently seeks nothing
higher than that void of nothingness it has succeeded in creating. The model, in fact, is not so
different from the hippie movement of not so long ago, where those apparent “hippies” turned into
the corrupt CEOÕs, bankers, corporate shills, scientists, and administrative government ofÞcials and
politicians of today, acting worse in their own sophisticated dispositions than any of those they
pretended to rail against in their movement. Like the hippie, there is simply no place to go, no Law
to strive for, and no foundational structure to support. Without a foundation, nothing can stand.
And with lawlessness as one's desired structural foundation, only chaos and disharmony can be
built thereof, for all else must by design fail without cohesiveness of its structure.

In approaching anarchy as a state of mind personiÞed, let us not look here at its modern ÒpopularÓ
form as the empty title of a not-so-newfangled political movement, but at the origin and intent of
the meaning of the word anarchy, which is only that of Òlawlessness,Ó Òchaos,Ó ÒinefÞcient law,Ó or
Òpolitical confusion.Ó The strange Reality is that any organized government of men without the
foundational principals of the Natural Law can only ever be in a system of anarchy. And not so
surprisingly, the further away man gets from these scriptural, foundational maxims of the Nature
and Source of Law the more anarchical (non-foundational) those principals and public laws
become. For they become solely man-made and are in no way self-evident. Black may suddenly be
legally adjudged as white, right as left, and known moral wrongness as legally and commercially
acceptable intercourse. These types of ÒdemocraciesÓ generally manifest into ÒuncivilizedÓ
tyrannies, dictatorships, and despotisms, or as the police-state we Þnd ourselves in today. Even as I
edit this work for Þnal print the devilish powers that seek to legally be in the United States have
replaced the words ÒheÓ and sheÓ with 32 new Òpersonal pronounsÓ of Ògender identiÞcation,Ó as
if NatureÕs gender assignments and chromosomal arrangements are all of a sudden not good
enough. Of course a legal title of ßattery such as these is only and can only ever be Þctional. They
simply do not Exist in the Reality of Nature. This is the self-evident law. And so Þction is very
appealing to the sophist and adulterer.

But how can we call this beast system as a democratic govern-ment (mind control) while at the
same time styling it as a legal state of anarchy? Is there precedent for such a radical description of a
governmental structure that has devolved into its last throws of democracy? Just what is
democracy anyway, and why is it promoted so fervently by the propagandist adulterers of nations?

Controlled chaosÉ Governed (controlled) men in licensed (permitted) lawlessnessÉ

—=—

DEMOCRATIC:

“Of or pertaining to democracy, or to a political party called

“democratic,” particularly, in the United States, the Democratic party,
which succeeded the Anti-federalist, or REPUBLICAN, party.”
—Black’s Law 4th Edition, deÞnition for ÔdemocraticÕ (Black4)

—=—

!140
 —=—

“DICTATORSHIP NATURALLY ARISES OUT OF DEMOCRACY, and

the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery OUT OF THE MOST
EXTREME LIBERTY.”
—Plato

—=—

“A PURE DEMOCRACY IS GENERALLY A VERY BAD

GOVERNMENT. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth;
for a multitude is often rash, and will not hear reason.”
—Noah Webster

—=—

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and

murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit
suicide.”
—John Adams

—=—

“DEMOCRACY IS INDISPENSABLE TO SOCIALISM.”




“Socialism is merely STATE-CAPITALIST MONOPOLY which is made
to serve the interests of the whole people…”
—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, (seperate quotes), excerpted from the pamphlet ‘The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat it, September 1917’ as Lenin’s Collected
Works, Progress Publishers, 1977, Moscow, Volume 25, from Lenin Internet Archive.

—=—

“DEMOCRACY IS THE ROAD TO SOCIALISM.”

—Karl Marx

—=—

“To my mind, there is a solution which has to do with democracy,

because democratic governments are subject to the will of the people
(not God). So, if the people will it, you can actually create
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS through the democratic states.”
—George Soros (emphasis added)

—=—

!141
 —=—

“DEMOCRACY IS ONLY A DREAM: it should be put in the same

category as Arcadia, Santa Claus, and Heaven.”
–H. L. Mencken

—=—

“The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which
particular representatives OF THE OPPRESSING CLASS ARE TO
REPRESENT AND REPRESS THEM in parliament.”
—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

“The best argument against democracy is a Þve-minute conversation

with the average voter.”
—Winston Churchill

—=—

“Our alliances should be understood as a means to expand our

inßuence, not as a constraint on our power. The expansion of democracy
and freedom IN THE WORLD should be A SHARED INTEREST AND
VALUE WITH ALL NATIONS.”
—Chuck Hagel, 24th United States Secretary of Defense under Obama, Chairperson of the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board

—=—

“Our country’s founders cherished liberty, not democracy.”

—Ron Paul

—=—

“I’ve always had a Marxist understanding of history: democracy is a

result of A BROAD MODERNIZATION PROCESS that happens in
every country. Neocons think the use of political power can force the
pace of change, but ultimately it depends on SOCIETIES DOING IT
THEMSELVES.”
—Francis Fukuyama

—=—

!142
 —=—

“SOMETIMES DEMOCRACY MUST BE BATHED IN BLOOD.”

—Augusto Pinochet, president of Chile

—=—

“Democracy consists of CHOOSING YOUR DICTATORS, after they’ve

told you what you think it is you want to hear.”
—Alan Coren

—=—

“Democracy means government by discussion, but it is only effective IF

YOU CAN STOP PEOPLE TALKING.”
—Clement Attlee

—=—

ÒThe ßood of money that gushes into politics today is a pollution of

democracy.”
—Theodore White

—=—

“THE PRESIDENT WILL LEAD IN THE TREASON. YOUR MILITIA

WILL LEAVE YOU AND FIGHT AGAINST YOU… WHEN EVIL MEN
TAKE OFFICE THE WHOLE GANG WILL BE IN COLLUSION. THEY
WILL KEEP THE PEOPLE IN UTTER IGNORANCE AND STEAL
THEIR LIBERTY BY AMBUSCADE (BY SUPRISE, BY LYING IN WAIT).
When Government removes your ARMaments, you will have no power,
but government will have all power.” 
—Patrick Henry (emphasis added)

—=—

“The IGNORANCE OF ONE VOTER in a democracy impairs the

security of all.”
—John F. Kennedy

—=—

!143
 —=—

“Democracy needs support, and the best support for democracy comes
from other democracies.”
—Benazir Bhutto

—=—

What is unnatural and against reason needs support to stand, for no foundational Law or structure
can be found.

The goal of the United Nations is to spread democracy (organized anarchy) and freedom (inter-
national commercial franchise/slavery under Social Security). It seeks to destroy all of man's
connection to God, to Nature, and thus to the True Source of self-evident Law so as to register us all
like cattle as Caesar did in the Bible and as the Pope declared in his Bull. You will have no doubt
this is True as we proceed in this work, and that this is a direct result not only of democracy
(illiterate mob rule) but of organized anarchy.

I was surprised to learn that the word license is a synonym of the word anarchy. And I cannot here
stress enough just how important this fact is! For what is a license but permission to break an
established or foundational law? Licensure is legalized lawlessness. For governments, it is much
easier to make all things illegal without a license than it is to make all things legal and then attempt
to take away those licensed Òrights.Ó And so we Þnd that under the public law of the legal matrix
code, everything from driving to marriage to free speech and religion is illegal without a license or
permit from the legal (anti-God) state. Even the so-called “legalization” of Marijuana is of course
the opposite of what that propagandist title appears, making illegal (in criminalization) every
aspect of it without state license to taxably purchase and use it as a legal person. And the slaves
cheer at their accomplishments as government takes even more control of all forms of cannabis,
controlling by licensed permission what is illegal for all other “persons,” and reserving the right to
deny it to all of us if it so chooses, for it is still an illegal “drug” even with a license (permission) to
use it. This is just another example of legal freedom being in actuality a regulated franchise. It is a
commercial tyranny, or in other words, organized lawlessness. For the tyrant is “sovereign,” having
no Higher Law above its own Þctional creation, and hides behind words like nation, security, and
peace.

Noting that a ÒtheocracyÓ is deÞned generally as a Òform of government in which God OR A

DEITY is recognized as the supreme ruler” (Random House, Webster’s College Dictionary, 2000), we
may better understand how the mob rule of democracy creates a false god out of the masses of
illiterates, the people, where towards the end of its age every empire falls due to the liberal
application and creation of self-made, self-righteous law without foundation in the principals of
Nature’s God, to where even all other opposing religions (moral laws) are welcomed within that
democratic society. And so the chaos builds as that which opposes the foundation of that nation
(i.e. the Bible) is welcomed with open arms.

We must understand that man’s law and his religions are of one and the same source, and that both
are regarded scripturally as evils that promote sin.

—=—

“The rejection of one god leads inescapably to the choice of another

god. If a person, group, court, etc. establishes himself as the Þnal arbiter
of right and wrong, then he/they have assumed the attributes of a god.
THUS, HE/THEY ARE THEOCRATIC… DEMOCRACY CAN BECOME

!144
 THEOCRATIC IF ABSOLUTE POWER IS GIVEN TO THE PEOPLE…
vox populi, vox dei, “THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE IS THE VOICE OF
GOD.” Those who promote a particular worldview and want to see it
implemented socially, educationally, politically, and judicially HAVE
ELEVATED THE MAJORITY TO THE STATUS OF GODS….

“One assumes the mantle of DEITY when he sets himself up as the

ultimate authority. It’s the attributes of deity that makes someone god-
like. In the eighteenth century, the French revolutionaries declared
“REASON” TO BE THE GODDESS of their new state religion.
Nineteenth century France was spoken of as “goddess France” by
patriotic Þgures like Victor Hugo and Charles Maurras. Hegel, the
philosophical patron saint of communism, wrote that, “THE STATE IS
THE DIVINE IDEA AS IT EXISTS ON EARTH… WE MUST
THEREFORE WORSHIP THE STATE AS THE MANIFESTATION OF
THE DIVINE ON EARTH… THE STATE IS THE MARCH OF GOD
THROUGH THE WORLD.”
ÑGary DeMar, American Vision website, ÒDeÞning Terms: Theocracy,Ó 26 February 2007

—=—

And so “the People” of the several (private) States (land/territories) that create and rule over the
nations establish themselves as the gods of the nations, as the current form without substance of
modern deity. Thus, “The People” is the deity of the United States, and it summons its subjects to
court, for “The People” can only summon their own property, the devil its own demons, which
means citizenships are not “The People.” You must ask yourself how many times you have heard
the “founding fathers” of America referred to with such divine, God-like inspiration and deity? In
how many ways and means is the pluralistic god of “We, the People” invoked and given the
functionality and authority in law as a singular deity?

Ted R. Weiland writes in his book BIBLE LAW vs. the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION that:

The idea that WE, THE PEOPLE represents a new god will prove difÞcult for many readers.
Let me defer to the inescapable truths of government and religion as presented by R.J.
Rushdoony. Note his second point particularly:

1. Law is in every culture religious in origin.

2. The source of law is the god of that society.
3. In any society, any change of law is an explicit or implicit change of religion.
4. No disestablishment of religion as such is possible in any society.
5. There can be no tolerance in a law-system for another religion.

ÑSourced by Weiland from Rousas John Rushdoony, ÔThe Institutes of Biblical LawÕ (The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1973) pp. 4-5.

—=—

And so I pose this question here again… What God do you worship and respect?

!145
But, of course, this is an unfair question. For the answer lies not in the empty words of your
unspiritual, dog-Latin answer but only in which god created the system of law that you actively
follow. As you might have heard, actions speak louder than words.

And so we must know what the Bible says about all of man’s law, which is translated also as
“Mosaic law” and Old Testament or Judaic law in the scriptures. When speaking of merely the
strict, written law, which allows for no spiritual and moral choice, then this law is considered as
dead, followed only by the spiritually dead without (outside of) Jehovah. In other words, the
written law alone cannot sufÞce in and of itself. It is not self-evident. Man must be Free to choose
which Law to obey and disobey according to a spiritual, moral code. But this is impossible within
the legal matrix, where God’s Nature and unwritten Law are violently sanctioned to be kept dead.

—=—

“Now we know that what things soever the law saith, IT SAITH TO
THEM WHO ARE UNDER THE LAW: that every mouth may be
stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. THEREFORE
BY THE DEEDS OF THE LAW THERE SHALL NO FLESH BE
JUSTIFIED IN HIS SIGHT: FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE
OF SIN. But now the righteousness of God WITHOUT THE LAW is
manifested…”
—Romans 3: 19-21, KJB

—=—

“For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, WAS NOT TO
ABRAHAM, OR TO HIS SEED, THROUGH THE LAW, BUT
THROUGH THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF FAITH. For if they which are
of the law be heirs, FAITH IS MADE VOID, and the promise made of
none effect: Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is
no transgression.”
—Romans 4:13-15, KJB

—=—

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, THERE
IS NEITHER MALE NOR FEMALE: FOR YE ARE ALL ONE IN
CHRIST JESUS. AND IF YE BE CHRIST'S, THEN ARE YE
ABRAHAM'S SEED, AND HEIRS ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE.”
—Galatians 3: 28-29, KJB

—=—

“Wherefore, my brethren, YE ALSO ARE BECOME DEAD TO THE

LAW BY THE BODY OF CHRIST; that ye should be married to another,

!146
 EVEN TO HIM WHO IS RAISED FROM THE DEAD, that we should
bring forth fruit unto God.”
—Romans 7: 2-4, KJB

—=—

“The sting of death is sin; and THE STRENGTH OF SIN IS THE LAW.”
—1 Corinthians 15:56, KJB

—=—

“Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where
sin abounded, grace did much more abound…”
—Romans 5:20, KJB

—=—


“For sin shall not have dominion over you: FOR YE ARE NOT UNDER
THE LAW, BUT UNDER GRACE.”
—Romans 6:14, KJB

—=—

“BUT IF YE HAVE RESPECT TO PERSONS, YE COMMIT SIN, AND

ARE CONVINCED OF THE LAW AS TRANSGRESSORS. For
whosoever shall keep the whole law, AND YET OFFEND IN ONE
POINT, HE IS GUILTY OF ALL.”
—James 2: 9-10, KJB

—=—

“Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the
transgression of the law.”
—1 John 3:4, KJB

—=—

“For I was ALIVE WITHOUT THE LAW once: but when the
commandment came, SIN REVIVED, AND I DIED.”
—Romans 7:9, KJB

—=—

!147
 —=—

“I Þnd then a law, that, WHEN I WOULD DO GOOD, EVIL IS

PRESENT WITH ME. For I delight in the law of God after the inward
man: BUT I SEE ANOTHER LAW IN MY MEMBERS, WARRING
AGAINST THE LAW OF MY MIND, AND BRINGING ME INTO
CAPTIVITY TO THE LAW OF SIN WHICH IS IN MY MEMBERS. O
wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this
death? I thank God THROUGH Jesus Christ our Lord. So then WITH
THE MIND I myself serve the law of God; but WITH THE FLESH the
law of sin.”
—Romans 7: 21-25, KJB

—=—

“For THE LAW OF THE SPIRIT OF LIFE in Christ Jesus hath made me
FREE FROM THE LAW OF SIN AND DEATH.”
—Romans 8:2, KJB

—=—

ÒI do not frustrate the grace of God: FOR IF RIGHTEOUSNESS COME

BY THE LAW, THEN CHRIST IS DEAD IN VAIN.”
—Galatians 2:21, KJB

—=—

It is difÞcult to consider the fact that the written law creates and even protects sin. Yet law is the
creator of Þctions, of persons, places, and things, which only exist in that legal realm of law. And yet
without any law (in anarchy) there is also no sin, for there is no law to recognize just what a ÒsinÓ
is. This dualistic feature is the very reason why the written law and the man following it is dead
without the spiritual, moral Law of Nature (God). If the moral foundation of Law is solid and
untainted, then no outlet for sin can penetrate through, especially those Þctional, written words
(spells) of men.

When christ states that there is neither male or female under God, we must realize that this means
that male and female are traits of the negative Design of Nature, Being self-evident, self-Existent
under God and therefore in need of no positive (legal/Þctional) proof. The lesson here is that it is
the fault of the female for identifying herself as such legally, as a ÒwomanÓ or womb-man, that
causes here own inequality and other problems under legal law. Under God, no female is more or
less than any man, for man (homo) refers to both sexes. Women do not Exist in Nature, for a woman
is a persona of man. Remember I Am (Exist) that I Am (Exist), not I am “womanÓ or even I am
Òman.Ó Just I am (I Exist in self-evidence). The legal law only applies to whatever Þction, person,
title, identity, property, number, or other token of identity that is spoken after I am ____.

Take note here that the creation of ÒmaleÓ and ÒfemaleÓ was a creation of the Elohim (plural gods)
in ÒtheirÓ own image within Chapter 1 of the Genesis story, and not by Jehovah in Chapter 2, who
formed man from the dust (i.e., minerals) of the Earth, a dichotomy that cannot be ignored and that

!148
will be expounded upon greatly in Chapter 2 of this work. But Þrst we must understand just what
is or can be pretended to be a creator (god)!

DICHOTOMY - noun - [Gr., a division into two parts; to cut.] 1. Division or distribution of
ideas by pairs. [Little used.] 2. In astronomy, that phase of the moon in which it appears
bisected, or shows only half its disk, as at the quadratures. (Webs1828)

—=—

Take special notice of Romans 7: 23-25 above. For this is the plight of the typical corporate
ÒChristian,Ó serving God with the proudest of legal mind but not at all with the moral actions of
the body and the Spirit of the soul. This is a dead member, a sinful disposition, the great pretender.
The mind cannot follow the written law alone, without the harmonious triad of body and soul
toward the Higher (unwritten) Law of God. For the unwritten Law (Word/Son of God) requires
more than just the logical practice of that strict law built of empty words. It requires a spiritual
choice in all paths and a moral discernment of all so-called ÒlawÓ ending Þnally in a choice to act or
not to act, and always Þrst under that unwritten, Highest Law. Where choice does not Exist, neither
does the Spirit. It is not enough to bear a cross upon one's persona (mask) as a simulation of some
pretended historical event of choice. For the symbol of the cross means nothing without continuous
intention and fulÞllment of the Law under Grace, and is used by most as a mere token or licensure
to follow not in the Highest Law that would justify such a ßattery of title. Ironically, no man of God
would ever label (ßatter) himself as ÒChristian,Ó for this act alone is a respect of an artful person
and title, and stands against the very foundation of GodÕs Law. This means that no man is ever a
ÒChristian,Ó for the only man who would claim such a title is a man under the written law of men
acting in legal persona, as one who seeks the shelter of such a false title in the legal realm.

Of course, we may understand why the very constitution of the United States protects its agents
and proctors from any Òreligious test.Ó For to test any congressman or attorneyÕs actions, both of
which are titles of ßattery, would instantly reveal them to be Þctional, legal persons acting under
manÕs law alone, not men of God. And yet they may still run their political (legal) campaigns
claiming to be ÒChristianÓ in their false ßattery of disposition, though no test is allowed to verify
this.

You see, a religious test of intent under Jehovah is very simple: dost ye walk the walk, or just talk
the talk?

—=—

“He that saith, I know him, and keepeth NOT his commandments, IS A
LIAR, AND THE TRUTH IS NOT IN HIM. BUT WHOSO KEEPETH
HIS WORD, IN HIM VERILY IS THE LOVE OF GOD PERFECTED:
hereby know we that we are in him. HE THAT SAITH HE ABIDETH IN
HIM OUGHT HIMSELF ALSO SO TO WALK, EVEN AS HE
WALKED.”
—1 John 2: 4-6, KJB

—=—

Now imagine this religious test being given to politicians, priests, and even to ourselvesÉ I tell you
humbly and sincerely that, as I write this, I cannot not pass this test. I say this because it is self-
evident in my actions, and so I need not lie to myself. I cannot cover up my defects by slapping a
ßattering title over my errors and claiming to be a ÒChristian.Ó I cannot wear a cross and hope that
it hides my daily breaking of the Natural Law. And I wager that only one in a million may even

!149
pass this test with a grade of D- (mostly unsatisfactory) on their spiritual report card. But then,
perhaps this is only True because we have been conditioned and led to choose to follow the mis-
leading doctrines of priests and politicians instead of studying and walking in christ’s example? Is
this not the doctrine of public education? Is this not the doctrine of the constitutions of the States
and United States? For many of us, we fail simply because the Bible has been demonized by the
very devils that lead us astray through politics, education, pop culture, and religion. My intent is to
study and learn enough to make the right choice soon, and hopefully help others do the same.

We have been led to follow the old law and therefore the old gods, of that which is written strictly
by men. And I cannot tell you how many times I hear the typical “Christian” claim that the Ten
Commandments alone are the only law, not understanding that the fulÞllment of the Law of God is
the Word of God, and that the deciphered Word/Law of God is the story of the Son (christos).

And yet we can read clearly about the LawÉ

—=—

“For THE LAW was given by Moses, BUT GRACE AND TRUTH CAME
BY JESUS CHRIST.”
—John 1:17, KJB

—=—

Grace and Truth comes to man through understanding the meaning of Jesus christ, as “Jehovah is
Salvation.”

To put this as clearly as possible and so that the above passages are not confused, we must know
that there are two versions of the same law: one written and strict (without choice), the other
unwritten as a spiritual choice and path in avoidance of that strict written law of the words of men.
While both of these laws may be sometimes equal in appearance, one is for the spiritually Living
and one is for the spiritually dead. The Mosaic (Jewish) law, as including the Ten Commandments,
is in context only the written law, and is thus dead (without spirit/choice). In other words, one
cannot follow such a written law in full without a free, deeper moral compass and spiritually
driven, conscious intent. Remember that a legal entity, a “person” may be charged with any crime
against those Ten Commandments while the man that acted in that person may be judged as
legally “not-guilty.” The person may have license to kill or steal, and so the man pretends his own
innocence by blaming his sin on that Þctional persona (mask) of the state. But this does not take
away the spiritual charge upon any man, as the True stain and sin upon one’s soul. Thus the man
who kills in persona (mask) and ßattering title cannot claim to have chosen or followed the
unwritten Law of God through christ. He can only say that he followed that unfulÞlled, dead
written law of men. And so it is said that the New Law, the New Testament, is the fulÞllment of
that Mosaic Law. You might say that the New Þlls in all the cracks of the Old, creating a spiritual
bond that cannot be broken, worked around, or misinterpreted. This is to say that the excuses used
in legal law cannot be used before God, for the spiritual foundation of Law says that no excuses
may be used; no persons, no ßattering titles, and especially no pretended licenses. To receive
license to kill from the legal state is perfectly lawful under the written “legal” law, a sort of work
around the ‘do not kill’ rule. But in no way does this written law override the unwritten Law (Word)
of GodÕs Nature. The license pretends to forgive the inescapable duty and consequence of moral
choice and action. And in the legal realm, we may simply replace the word kill with another term of
art, such as to “take” a terrorist or “remove” a political (artiÞcial) person or enemy. And so we say that
the written law is dead, even in its apparent perfection on paper (or engraved on stone tablets like
a tombstone). But that perfection may only be obtained by the Living Spirit of man acting Þrstly
and always under the Highest spiritual, moral Law. For the perfection of the written law is so easily
broken by legal anarchy (licensure), and by the introduction of Þction into any system of law. That

!150
which is Þctional is not under the Law of self-Existence and Its God (Jehovah), and so Þctional
persons, places, and things (nouns/names) are used to pretend innocence; to pretend our actions
are not our own. However, the New Testament as the New Law, clearly deÞnes that the Law of
Nature is that we are always, without exception, responsible for our own actions. Our so-called
ÒÞnal judgementÓ by God will therefore have no allowance for the excuses of artful names and
titles within the Þctional persons, places, and things of legal Þction.

To apply a metaphor here, the Old ÒwrittenÓ law practiced without the New ÒMoralÓ Law (Word/
Son) applied as Higher than the Old is like a brick wall without mortar; a window without a seal.
Only with a secure foundation may the Law stand and be fulÞlled. Without the glue of spirituality,
of Oneness with GodÕs Nature, the law made of only words on paper/stone will be made to wither.

Finally, as an example of how this is True today, we may consider the differing dispositions
between the Jew (and the Judaized corporate ÒChristianÓ) and the True follower of christ. ItÕs very
simple, for it has only to do with the application of the Law. The Jew for instance, in his common
practice of usury as allowed by his written law, uses the law to harm others through interest. The
man of God through christ would not dream of issuing such a curse as usury, for his Law prevents
even his respect of mammon, let alone the practice of usury. And so while the Old Law is used to
harm legally, the New Law is used to prevent all possibility of harm and teaches instead absolute
harmony.

Again, what we are really seeing here is the difference between positive law and the negative Law.

Negative or Natural Law is inherent, and is expressed by man by the fulÞllment of his duty to God
to do no harm or injury to any other man. Synonyms for the word inherent include: intact, organic,
entire, constitutional, constitutive, integral, inherent, underlying, inbuilt, built-in, and implicit in.

Positive or legal law is extrinsic of the man and is only expressed by legal words. It can only be
applied when the negative Law and Laws of Nature are abandoned, and it literally requires harm
and injury to other men. Synonyms for the word extrinsic include: accidental, external, incidental,
outward, subsidiary, superadded, superÞcial, superßuous, superimposed, supplemental, transient,
and unconnected.

And when we see the antonyms for what is extrinsic, we get the full picture, including: congenital,
essential, immanent, inborn, inbred, indispensable, indwelling, ingrained, inherent, inhering,
inseparable, internal, intrinsic, native, and natural.

And so the positive, written law is that which is formed outside of Nature, and more importantly
can only be attached to that which is outside of Nature, i.e., legal (artiÞcial) persons, places and
things (nouns/names). Inversely, the unwritten Law of Nature is what is referred to as the God-
given, unalienable rights of all men (not persons). It can Exist only in man and not without. And
therefore Its True expression can only come from a Pure, untainted man of God.

Without man, positive law does not and simply cannot exist, for there would be no force behind
positive (written) law in its artiÞce without man breathing Þctional, legal life into it. Without man,
only the Law of Nature would Exist.



Without Jehovah (all of self-Existence Itself as ÒGodÓ), man cannot Exist. And so the negative Law
of Nature would also not have need to Exist. Law must have a Creator, be it manÕs Þctions or
NatureÕs self-Evident and Supreme Being (verb). The lawmaker is the creator (God) of whatever
law is followed, be it manÕs legalities or NatureÕs Law.

This does not require a blind ÒbeliefÓ in any form, idol, or image of any man-made or imagined
god. One need no imagine what is self-Evident and self-Existent. It does, however, require one to
follow the Law they choose religiously, without deviation. This is not religion, but the essence of

!151
either Living Purely under the Natural Law or pretending to live in spiritual death under the
corruption of man’s legal inventions and trickery.

These are merely self-evident Truths.

The Truth is that most “anarchists” I’ve had the chance to speak with are so busy defending the
word anarchy from every possible accepted reference source out there that they do very little else
but defend their own ßattering title and its purpose. This is not unlike the defense of the self-
proclaimed “Christian,” who has nothing to show in his actions for bearing such a spiritually
ßattering but false title. Of course, this defensive, emotional posture is only a reasonable
conclusion, as these notions of “anarchy” (lawlessness) and of “Christianity” (corporate religion)
are foreign to God's Nature and Its Laws. In other words, anarchy is not self-evident or self-
existent any more than manÕs Þctions of law and ecclesiastics are. For the laws of men are made of
words, being not a self-Existent part of Nature, and so the best an anarchist could wish for is to have
no written law while in acknowledgement of the involuntary Source of his own Life in Nature and
under Its Law. But then the word anarchy is as useless as the nihilist’s musings about the very
Existence he denies with every dependent breath, for the Law of Existence cannot be destroyed,
only denied by fools. Man simply cannot Exist without (outside of) Nature. The unwritten, moral
Law is self-Existent, and so man has no choice or determination in Its Existence, only in Its
voluntary usage. If It is followed, It fulÞlls the written law in any form, for Its principal
foundations defeat anything written that may be antichrist and in opposition to the Natural Law.
The written, legal law is but a trap awaiting those who fall from the spiritual Law into the rabbit
hole of its Þctions. It may be fought and ignored only as long as the man playing the ÒanarchistÓ
Exists and no longer, at which point the non-Existence of that man will show that the Law never
left, for it is the Law of Life Itself. The pathetically insigniÞcant actions of men on this earth simply
cannot undue the Law and Laws of Nature in any permanent way, for again man’s very Life force
depends on the harmony of his own Life with the Laws of Nature (God), which he is a very
minuscule part of.

The Law of Existence (God), that is, the very fabric and Source of self-Existent Life in Oneness,
simply cannot be defeated. To defeat it would require the death of one's own Life, meaning that
anarchy may only ultimately lead to a suicidal form of Self-defeat, since the Self is pretended to be
divided from any ruler (God) and no Law of the Oneness of all Nature may be had. Without Life
(Existence), nothing is left to push the Þction of law or of lawlessness. Without man's law and the
rulers (gods) of it, what use would the anarchist be? Without law there would be no drive for the
support of lawlessness, and in fact the opposite desire for law would be True, creating an anti-
anarchist movement. The point is that both of these ideals (positive law and lawlessness) are purely
of man's imaginations, and cannot Exist in permanence in Reality except by the designs and violent
force of those men.

—=—

“THERE IS NO FICTION WITHOUT LAW.”

—NUNQUAM FICTIO SINE LEGE. (Black4)

—=—

Translation: Þction belongs to and is forced into existence by manÕs law. There is no Þction outside
of what manÕs law allows to be artiÞcially created. For Þction must have its own law to pretend
existence. And for it to have power and authority, its false existence (artiÞcial life) must be enforced
by men, by hireling pawns in uniformity, militarily brainwashed to protect and enforce Þction over
Reality to the death. These are the agents of the legal matrix, and all who claim citizenship or other
beneÞt from it can and will protect it and its law, for their very false identity of legal (artful)
existence as its members and citizens depends upon its continuance as a Þction of law. Our
substance as men, our spirit and soul is dying in Real Life while we Þght like angry wasps to keep

!152
the Þctional nest, the keeper of our own Þctional identities, intact and empowered. This is not
science Þction, this is the story of every man caught up in the legal matrix of an identity (persona/
mask) created as a Þctional existence within manÕs legal law system. It is a denial of not only Reality,
of self-evident Truth, but of the True Self.

Strange as it may seem, Þctions are a direct result of law, or rather which law one follows. To
worship Jehovah is to worship only what Exists in Reality, in Nature, and to respect no Þctions and
therefore no other laws (doctrines) but that of NatureÕs Law and endlessly seeded abundance. It is
not enough for a Þction to be declared to exist, it must have some god-like authority and military
force to make its pretended existence effect oneÕs Reality. It is so very important to understand that
Þctions do not exist under the Law of Nature, the Law of God. Only man is the creator of such
synthetic (sinful) entities (Þctions of law). Thus no man of God would ever be ruled by the law of
men bearing Þctional names and titles such as king, pope, prime minister, or president. These are
all creations of law, and without law there is no Þction. Of course, without Þction, there is no
pretended legal or ecclesiastical authority.

Inversely, the follower of christ must ensure the non-Þctional, unwritten, self-evident Law of
Nature is always followed without exception, and so is in a permanent state of Being. This may in a
Pure sense be called the intent of True Òchristianity,Ó but only if the ßattery of that Þctional title is
not more powerful than the actions of the man bearing it, so that his title means nothing in the eyes
of God and of the Þctional gods of the written law. No man following christ would need such a
ßattering title, and so the title (noun/empty name) is merely a redundancy. No man acting in
lawlessness would need such a title as ÒanarchistÓ either, for his actions would certainly deÞne his
nature. This is to say that the more spiritual (True) knowledge a man may acquire, the less desire or
need he would have to take upon his Pure Nature any sophist ßattering title whatsoever. His
actions would deÞne his character, not empty words. And so, as I look around, I see an extreme
absence of both Truly lawless, ungoverned men and True followers of christ. I see only men
wearing ßattering titles, jewelry, and having tattoos that describe what they wish to be but are not.
And the current legal law system allows such expressions of Òfree speechÓ and self-ßattery without
proofs simply because make-believe and false-identities allow for better human capital
management. Only the follower of the Law (Word/Son) would be free of those chains of servitude,
and chances are they would not be hanging out with ÒChristiansÓ and Òanarchists,Ó for the bible
instructs us to escape the nations, to never bow to their idolatrous gods, and to turn away from
false doctrines of man's re-created religions. Only then may we Þnd True Peace in one another and
Live Truly and Charitably without blemish and mark under the foundation of NatureÕs Law. In
other words, those pretending to exist in ßattering title would likely not even recognize those who
actually Live by the Law of the false ßattering titles and namesakes they falsely bear, and would
instead judge them as homeless, lawless, and un-Christian-like. The corporate Christian would
persecute the True follower, and the anarchist would treat as an outsider he who wasnÕt either
wearing the same uniform, jewelry, or ink of that movement, or at least speaking the same artful
terms of it. The irony is thick as thieves.

To put this another way, the ÒanarchistÓ is also the opposing force of what is the law of Þction, just
as is the True christian or jew, as he who apparently stands against that false law of the nations and
gods of the goyim. In this way alone they are alike.

—=—

“Politics is a pendulum whose swings BETWEEN ANARCHY AND

TYRANNY are fueled by perpetually rejuvenated illusions.”
—Albert Einstein

—=—

!153
The anarchists solution is to obtain nothingness, as no false or Real Law or any ruler at all, and thus
no god (Real or legal) over such a falsely created realm (jurisdiction) of law. Thus his solution must
necessarily lead to his own title’s destruction. For at the point he attains his goal, his title’s purpose
dies with it. And so his only path would be to either enjoy such a short-lived chaos or to become
the next tyrant and therefore law-maker so as to ensure that no other form of law can be put into
place to defeat his own goal of lawlessness, which would unintentionally make him just the next
ruler over the leaderless chaos he originally fought for. Anarchy cannot Exist in Reality simply
because in order to be free, one must rule (govern/control) one’s Self. But, as opposed to the Law of
Nature, if each man has his own idea and language of what his own law is in such an anarchist
environment, then 1,000 men (rulers) with 1,000 different sets of law will be forced to live and deal
with each other. How quaint that sounds, eh? For if the anarchist does not become the ruler, even if
over only himself, how can he ensure that anarchy remains as the forced law of no law or ruler at
all? He would necessarily need to break the Natural Law in order to interfere and forcibly cause or
prevent (harm/interfere) other men from organizing together for their own religious or legal self-
government.

The point here should be clear. Anarchy is opposed (satanic/adversarial) to christianity and thus to
the Natural Law of God. To those who Þnd this somehow insulting, donÕt shoot the messenger. I
use the word satanic only in the correct grammar, as an accurate grammatical description (adjective)
to describe the disposition of one thing to another. But you may purposefully interpret this how
you wish, despite my statement of intent, to mean that I just threw around a logical fallacy by
labeling anarchists as some satanic cult (noun). Again, to be satanic means to be the adversary of
whatever the object of that satanism is. It carries no other meaning here, and it is not name-calling,
for I use it not as a noun. So do as thou wilt, if though wish it, or stick around and remember my
intent with this work, which is to Þnd the One and only Real Truth.

It is as ridiculous to assume that all men would thrive in lawlessness as it is to assume that all men
might Þnd Jehovah through christ and Live spiritually under the Natural, negative Law alone in
some perfect utopian Earth. Let us be clear on this point and that the author is pushing nothing of
that sort of utopian society. One must only learn the actual meaning of this word utopia to realize
that it is of course an impossible dream… but that’s for another chapter. The Bible states clearly that
it will be a considerably small remainder of only those like-minded men who seek to be the sons of
God, and that we should of course leave such corrupt places and peoples so as to separate
(circumcise ourselves) from legal, public societies of non-like-minded people. We are not to
publicly worship God through christ while intermingling in the corruption of legal law systems
and their gods and as their agents in mammon, but instead are to be private (foreign) in our affairs
with all men and all nations, renouncing all public Þctions of identity, authority, and titles. We are
to speak as christ did, in the verse of the impersonal, ambiguous parable, which will be covered
later in this work. For now, only realize that to never acknowledge or consent to such legal names
and titles of others is to never have the capacity to be summoned as one of them (as legal state
property), by any of them (by any other god). With no voluntarily attached legal surname or artful
mark of positive law identity, no property (person) in surety legally exists, and thus no public law
or authority exists over the Pure Living man of God that has made none or quit claiming that
member-ship. This is the only True Freedom, and with that Natural (negative) Freedom comes the
duty to follow the Highest foundation of Law at all times. Thus the citizen-ship trades in his
commercial vessel on the Þctional sea to allow his body to be a Vessel of God in Its True and Only
Nature.

Thus the wannabe ruler-less and thus godless “anarchist” will always only have the capacity for
political freedom, which is a franchise (incorporation) of legal person-hood in one of the debtor’s
hells of the nations, be they democracies or tyrannies. Without such a protected legal status in some
form of personhood or even that which is less than a person, an involuntary slave, the state would
instead label the anarchist as some form of enemy of the state, as a “terrorist,” “insurgent,” or other
sanctionable ßattering title standing in conspiracy towards any government under the law of
nations. And so the arrogance of public show and the former self-ingratiation of ßattery in that
publicly proclaimed title would certainly then be kept to oneself if anarchy ever did come to be,

!154
just as the “Jews” and the “homosexuals” logically tried to hide their religious and sexual identities
from the National Socialists during the World War II era. For the “anarchist” will be welcomed by
no ruler, and yet imprisoned (nationalized into franchise citizenship) or enslaved or killed by all
rulers. But then why would any fool go around in an economic collapse wearing the symbol of his
love for lawlessness? A handshake would be silly, and no private promise or contract would be safe
or trustworthy. Would you do business with someone that declares to have no law, thus no known
ethics or moral boundaries as a mutual foundation in your mutual intercourse? Really? Seriously
though, what “anarchist” would want to be an “anarchist” in a state of True anarchy? For anarchy
is a state of no Trust, no faith, and no consequence for one’s own actions. What is more opposite or
adversarial from the predictability of those under the Law of God’s Nature, where all one may
expect from another is the same Love and Charity in all things, where the Highest Law is to ensure
the wealth of all others above they Self?

This is the self-evident way of things. For those in control and authority over the legal systems and
nations of today are of course merely the tyrannical rulers that arose from the last period of
lawlessness and tyranny, passing on their Lawless (sovereign) estate, kingdom, and power to each
new generation of tyrants and heirs of the fabled genealogy of the bloodlines of ancient families of
organized criminals and pirates. This is not oxymoronic or ridiculous, it is just that most common
people never contemplate the True meanings of the artful words that govern them in their persons
and self-ßattery. Kings are merely anarchists (sovereigns) who rule without law above them, and
stay in power until the debauchery and devolution of society caused by democracy forces those
rulers of nations to change empires, power structures, currency of mammon, and to implement
measures of despotism where control of the power to issue the legal chaos of licensure (organized
anarchy) is lost.

And so we can actually deÞne here what the term religion in its Truest intent means. That our entire
livelihood, our employments, our discourse, and all of our interactions with all men should be
voluntarily bound and happily so under the Law of God. That we should follow the Son (Law)
religiously at all times without exception. And that all results of our actions are in worship of
Jehovah, of Nature, and of all Life therein.

Somehow this completely reasonable and wonderful design as laid out in the Bible in story-form
has been squashed and mutated into modern, Romanized Christianity, and only on Sundays. The
intentions of the scribes of man’s religions seems clear, which is to steer all common men away
from the knowledge of scripture and from the worship of the Oneness of Existence; to separate and
externalize God from Nature.

This has been the old world order. The New World Order being incrementally brought together and
empowered through the United Nations is a perpetual and military (peacekeeper) enforced, uniÞed
world democracy, a structure of open, international commerce that allows no individual people of
any nation to revolt. For each nation is merely a state in union of that United Nations holding
corporation, and all men will be marked and registered (branded) under Caesar…

In other words, we will all be kept in the lowest form of government possible, a global democratic
state, where the naturally resulting inclination of democracy towards tyranny and despotism is
forcibly, militarily prevented no matter how corrupt and powerful the principal rulers over that
democracy become. The 2016 presidential election is a perfect example of this, with rioters pro-
testing even as I am writing this. For when the choice between two evils becomes so glaringly
obvious as the evil it is, conformity to the “volunteerism” of such a democratic (mob rule) system
must be violently enforced. Democracy, of course, and especially the voting process, is the greatest
of political delusions. It is a system of causality with planned outcome sold as a system of choice
and randomness.

The persecuted remainder of christ’s True Church (People) are only those who will not participate
in that commercial matrix of mammon because they have taken no person, title, or mark, no name
or number, and hold no respect for such Þctions and authorities. Their persecution is a negative

!155
one, meaning that they are excluded from all Þctional things and laws, all beneÞts reserved for the
greedy, democratic multitude living without cause in socialist contract. Charity is illegal there
without license, for the organized, anarchist legal society is of course anti-God, antichrist, and so
anti-Law (in anarchy to God's Law).

The Bible is not merely a story to be labeled vulgarly as true or false, it is a parabolically delivered
warning of consequential inevitability. It expresses the only reasonable result of a global people
brought together under one language and legal law (babel) without a Higher, moral foundation of
Law that is followed religiously and without exception. And this is why the Þgurative, timeless,
non-historical allegory of the Bible and all of its characters must be realized and no longer falsely
worshiped as the actual Romanized (romantic) history of the past, for its storied perpetuity of
possible events and outcomes can happen at any time and in any place and in all places at once
where the Law (Son) of God is not followed by each man. It is simply the story of the Law (Word,
Son) of Nature and the obvious resulting consequences of those who break from It to pursue
Þctional nonsense. And it is time to admit to our Selves that we are Living in the scriptures worst
possible storied fable right now. The proof is in the belief and use of the strawman, in the
corruption of blood and marks of false identity and ßattering title that you and I are currently
bearing even as you read this! To deny the story of christ is to deny one's own place within our
current Þctional nightmare, and more importantly, it is a denial of the only exit route from that
legal matrix ever given to us.

And so no, absolutely not are all men sovereign (without law). For sovereignty too is only a
ßattering title not of God's Word or of NatureÕs Law. No man in one's own right mind would wish
another man to be titled as sovereign (lawless) above him. This is completely antichrist in its
structure, which is why the sole corporations and titles of pope, the queen, and nations are labeled
as Òsovereigns.Ó Only men of God, under God's Law of Nature, may be free of those sovereign
anarchists (gods) of the nations, for True men of God are merely Being what they Truly are and
pretending to be nothing else and under no other god (ruler). Their actions, their works, and their
use of spiritual words alone make them immune from the laws of men who pretend sovereignty
from their own place in NatureÕs Realm and Law. And none of these faithful followers of the Law
(Son) would ever have need to call themselves as ÒChristiansÓ or as ÒAnarchists,Ó for their actions
alone speak the unwritten language of God's Word (Law).

To be clear, a king is in anarchy to God's Law of Nature because that king can only exist in Þction,
and thus necessarily without the Law of God that respects no such Þctions. The king (or queen)
necessarily stands as a replacement god before that of Jehovah against those foundational
Commandments, is called as Òfather,Ó exists only in a corporate ßattering title, and claims to be a
sovereign (without higher law) lawmaker.

One popular alternative deÞnition of the word anarchy is taken from its etymological roots, an and
arch which signiÞes Òno ruler.Ó This word-magic is used by gurus selling products while pre-
tending that anarchy does not actually mean lawlessness and chaos, but that somehow there can be
a supported system of law with no ruler (creator/lawmaker) and enforcer of that law. While at Þrst
this sounds emotionally reasonable and even hopeful as the quite logical fallacy it is, one soon
discovers that this deÞnition is quite popular among satanists and atheists more than any other
group, which are of course usually the loudest teachers and proÞts of anarchy. And so when we
actually deÞne the word ÒrulerÓ we come again to the word Ògod.Ó No ruler? How about no God?
No gods? No God, and therefore no Law (Word) of God? No example to follow?

ARCH - noun - [See ARC.] - adjective [Latin arcus, a bow; Eng. ROGUE.] Cunning; sly;
shrewd; waggish; mischievous for sport; mirthful; as we say in popular language, roguish; as
an arch lad. Used also in composition. [Gr. CHIEF.] CHIEF; OF THE FIRST CLASS;
PRINCIPAL; as, an arch deed. Shakespeare uses this word as a noun; ÔMy worthy arch and
patronsÕ; but the use is not authorized. (Webs1828)

!156
 ARC - noun - [Latin arcus, a bow, vault or ARCH; arcuo, to bend; Greek, BEGINNING,
ORIGIN; TO BEGIN, TO BE THE AUTHOR OR CHIEF. The Greek word has a different
application, but is probably from the same root as arcus, from the sense of springing or
stretching, shooting up, rising, which gives the sense of a vault, or bow, AS WELL AS OF
CHIEF OR HEAD. Hebrew, to weave; to desire, or long for, to ascend. Gr.; Latin fragro; and
the sense of arch is from stretching upwards, ascending. From arc or arch comes the sense of
bending, deviating and cunning.] In geometry, any part of the circumference of a circle, or
curved line, lying from one point to another; a segment, or part of a circle, not more than a
semicircle. (Webs1828)

—=—

Strangely enough, the United States is actually the self-proclaimed arch enemy of all its own public
citizen-ships, being principal and chief of all agents while labeling all public persons as potential
and ofÞcially declarable enemies of the state.

But back to the dialectic (logic) of the anarchist dream, of law without a source, creation without a
creator. So where does this mysterious set of laws within the boundless heights of controlled chaos
settled into a system of anarchy (lawlessness) come from, and what is their foundation? There is no
beginning, no author, no head or chief, and no origin, and so of course there is no arch. There is no
god. So how is such an imagined law with no source and no author and no quotable sanction
initially agreed upon and then subsequently enforced? What is the name of that law, for it cannot
be the Law of Nature (God)? Is this law written or unwritten, common or strict, new or old or
mixed, enforceable or not? Who decides when the law is broken? Who judges? Who was the author
of that law in the Þrst place, or did it just appear from nihilistic nothingness in some pretended
little big bang? And how does one seek remedy in such a case where lawlessness is the ruler and
forgiveness unlikely; where sin is the law? For not even the old law of an eye for an eye would have
effect or boundary here, let alone the teachings of christ.

With christ (the Son/Law/Word of God), with the example of how to Truly Live under the Law of
God and Nature, these questions are answered perfectly. In fact, Charity and Loving Forgiveness
alone defeats almost any “civil” issues imaginable. But in a state of lawlessness, I’m not sure how
these questions can even be asked with a straight face!

And so indeed we begin to see a comparison of this sort of non sequitur (non-starter) that is anarchy
to what is called nihilism.

NIL - Latin. Nothing. A contracted form of “nihil," which see. (Black4)


NIHIL - Latin. Nothing. Often contracted to "nil." The word standing alone is the name of an
abbreviated form of return to a writ made by a sheriff or constable, the fuller form of which
would be "nihil est" or "nihil habet," according to circumstances. (Black4)


NIHIL EST - There is nothing. A form of return made by a sheriff when he has been unable to
serve the writ. "Although non est investus is the more frequent return in such a case, yet it is by
no means as full in answer to the command of the writ as is the return of nihil. That amounts to
an averment that the defendant has nothing in the bailiwick, no dwelling-house, no family,
no residence, and no personal presence to enable the ofÞcer to make the service required by
the act of assembly. It is therefore a full answer to the exigency of the writ." (Black4)

NIHILIST - One advocating DOCTRINE OF NIHILISM. Webster. ONE DEVOTED TO THE

DESTRUCTION OF THE PRESENT POLITICAL, RELIGIOUS, AND SOCIAL
INSTITUTIONS. (Black4)

NIHILITY - noun - Nothingness; a state of being nothing. (Webs1828)

!157
 NILL - verb transitive - Not to will; to refuse; to reject. - verb intransitive - To be unwilling.
(Webs1828)

—=—

It is interesting to note that in 1828, Webster had no other deÞnition than that of nihility in his
research and dictionary, for the concept of a nihilist (as a ßattering title) is a slightly more modern
transÞguration of this word. And we must consider here why this is so. As a dictionary that
included especially the scriptural meanings and uses of words, as usual we Þnd that the nihilist and
that false doctrine is taken right from the Bible and twisted into its adversaria. In other words, as a
book of Law and how to Live correctly under It, anarchy is satanic to the intent of the Bible.

—=—

“Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that you all speak the same thing, and THAT THERE BE NO
DIVISIONS AMONG YOU, BUT THAT YOU BE PERFECTLY JOINED
TOGETHER IN THE SAME MIND AND IN THE SAME JUDGMENT.”
—1 Corinthians 1:10, KJB

—=—

“For all the Athenians and the foreigners who were there spent their
time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing… Some
therefore cried one thing and some another, FOR THE ASSEMBLY WAS
CONFUSED, AND MOST OF THEM DID NOT KNOW WHY THEY
HAD COME TOGETHER… And some among the multitude cried one
thing and some another. SO WHEN HE COULD NOT ASCERTAIN
THE TRUTH BECAUSE OF THE TUMULT, he commanded him to be
taken into the barracks.”
—Acts 17:21; 19:32; 21:34, KJB

—=—

The Bible does not speak of anarchy by name, only in adversarial verse towards christ, towards the
Word (Law). These two examples certainly show the difference between the Òtumult and
confusionÓ of anarchy and the uniÞed but free-willed intention and purpose of all followers of
christ under God's Law. It is the story of chaos (satanism) vs. Law (the Natural Design of Jehovah).
And its reference is generally to the artiÞce of legal law and licensure (anarchy, personhood) vs. the
spirit of GodÕs Natural Law and the unwavering duty attached to It and to all men that claim It.

Etymologically, we Þnd these terms in their noun form to be relatively modern. The noun (name/
title) nihilism is Þrst seen around 1817, and is said to be "the doctrine of negation" in reference to
religion or morals, from German Nihilismus, from Latin nihil "nothing at all" (see nil), coined by
German philosopher Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi (1743-1819). In philosophy, nihilism is an extreme
form of skepticism (1836). The political sense was Þrst used by German journalist Joseph von
Gšrres (1776-1848). Turgenev used the Russian form of the word (nigilizm) in "Fathers and
Children" (1862) and claimed to have invented it. With a capital N-, it refers to the Russian
revolutionary ANARCHISM of the period 1860-1917, supposedly so called because "nothing"

!158
that then existed found favor in their eyes. The noun (name/title) nihilist as used in a religious or
philosophical sense is from French nihiliste, from Latin nihil, and in the Russian political sense was
recorded from 1871.

The Bolshevik Red Army following the Russian revolution in 1917 reportedly killed ten’s of
millions of white farmers and bourgeoisie (common people of the cities) after its initial anarchical
staging throughout the holodomor, meaning “extermination by hunger.”

—=—

"There is only one way to prevent the restoration of the police, and that
is TO CREATE A PEOPLE'S MILITIA AND TO FUSE IT WITH THE
ARMY.”
—Vladimir Lenin, September 1917

—=—

Funny thing… in America we call this “people’s militia” as the federalized “National Guard,”
which is absolutely connected, fused, and directed by the president of the US when called upon to
defend the United States, while True militias of the People of each several State are shunned,
banned and diminished in their private legitimacy and capacity through propaganda, not unlike
the model of Lenin’s Bolshevik Red Army. Of course, what it is that we call police today are only
revenue collectors for the municipal corporation they are employed by. Police that protect the
common people from the tyrants (employers) of government are nowhere to be found. And the so-
called patriots in America cheer on these hired hands that utterly control them, even when they are
legally conÞscating property and stealing openly through licensed asset forfeiture.

But we should remember well that our idea of “police” is quite different from what it was back
when Noah Webster wrote his classic Dictionary of the English Language in 1828. There were no
speciÞc police ofÞcers as we know them. The word police was used then as a reference to the whole
government, the entire corporate structure, not just the ignorant, violent executive force.

POLICE - noun - [Latin politia; Gr. city.] 1. THE GOVERNMENT of a city or town; the
administration of the laws and regulations of a city or INCORPORATED town or borough;
as the police of London, of New York or Boston. The word is applied also to the government
of all towns in New England WHICH ARE MADE CORPORATIONS BY A GENERAL
STATUTE, for certain purposes. 2. The internal regulation and government of a kingdom or
state. 3. THE CORPORATION OR BODY OF MEN GOVERNING A CITY. 4. In Scottish, the
pleasure-ground about a gentleman's seat. (Webs1828)

—=—

Police merely meant the whole of a city, a body politic (corporation).

Modern police gangs are now organized as separate, corporate departments within each municipal
corporation (city, town, county, local district, state, etc.). But nothing has really changed. For this
deÞnition just lets us understand ever more clearly that all corporate places, all states and all
corporate governments and cities within, are militarily controlled under military rule. Whereas
before there was no distinction made between “police” and “government,” today we pretend
police to be a separate and necessary evil, when in fact without police such legalistic evil and law
could not thrive. Those weaselly, frail men as the perpetuators of the organized crimes of the
administrative, judicial, and legislative ofÞces of governments today rely on the military force of
their federalized, militarized police departments (hired, mercenary guns) to protect them from
those commoners they exact and extort from.

!159
But the greatest difference is that modern police know virtually nothing about the actual law they
pretend to enforce, unable to answer even the most basic of questions. The more dumb the brute
squad, the less they will question their contractual duty in a gang-mentality to harass and harm
others for a living in mammon. The militia man was a Real, educated man protecting his Real
family and People, not a petty, prostituting ofÞcer of the corporations of the gods. One protects
people from government, while the other protects government from people.



And so LeninÕs plan to obfuscate the legitimate police has come to deÞnitive fruition in these
United States, where militias are demonized and a standing army is worshiped and celebrated
despite such a standing army of the king of England in peacetime being a major reason listed for
the creation of Declaration Of Independence.

Ironically, a self-governing people under GodÕs Law of Nature acting through christ has very little
need for such an organized, militarized police force. But then, that same Truth is also why there are
so many police in the Godless United States!

—=—

“The greatest threat to the American national security is THE

AMERICAN MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT, AND THE NO-HOLDS-
BARED TYPE OF LOGIC IT USES to justify its zillion dollar existence.”
—Senator J.W. Fulbright, from his book “The Pentagon Propaganda Machine” (1971)

—=—

Once money and the valuation of all things in mammon corrupts the mind and intention of the
patriot, he, or should I say his legal persona (status) necessarily becomes his own worst enemy. For
money may purchase only slavery (property), not True Freedom. As the typical patriot has no idea
that nationhood is against Bible Law, or more speciÞcally that to have a nationality (legal ethnicity)
is to choose the legal law of nations and its false gods over that of Nature. And so the fervent
protector of the Þction existing in such a patriotic mindset of false persona, existing solely to protect
and beneÞt his false master and principal (the nation) in mammon, will be easily lead to kill his
fellow man and destroy his own Nature (Jehovah) on its (the Þctional statusÕs) behalf. The false
“Christian” will be pitted against the false “atheist” and against those who believe themselves to be
revolutionary “anarchists,” but who are merely acting as pawns in a very old, much coveted plan
of the ages. For the third world war was planned long ago…

—=—

“We shall unleash THE NIHILISTS AND THE ATHEISTS, and we shall
provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show
clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery
and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, THE CITIZENS,
OBLIGED TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AGAINST THE WORLD
MINORITY OF REVOLUTIONARIES, WILL EXTERMINATE THOSE
DESTROYERS OF CIVILIZATION, AND THE MULTITUDE,
DISILLUSIONED WITH CHRISTIANITY, WHOSE DEISTIC SPIRITS
WILL FROM THAT MOMENT BE WITHOUT COMPASS OR
DIRECTION, ANXIOUS FOR AN IDEAL, BUT WITHOUT KNOWING

!160
 WHERE TO RENDER ITS ADORATION, WILL RECEIVE THE TRUE
LIGHT THROUGH THE UNIVERSAL MANIFESTATION OF THE
PURE DOCTRINE OF LUCIFER, BROUGHT FINALLY OUT IN THE
PUBLIC VIEW. This manifestation will result from the general
REACTIONARY MOVEMENT WHICH WILL FOLLOW THE
DESTRUCTION OF CHRISTIANITY AND ATHEISM, BOTH
CONQUERED AND EXTERMINATED AT THE SAME TIME.”
—Quoted from a disputed source: Albert Pike, from a letter to Giuseppe Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871

—=—

To this author’s mind, and as to the reason I am compiling this work, the only way to escape this
Masonic prophecy from being self-fulÞlled is if each of us wake up to what the Bible actually
forewarns us about. For none of these plans may take root without the already ingrained false
ideals of corporate “Christianity” and its subsequent opposition of atheistic thought patterns, two
sides of a coin that has no substance, like matter and antimatter colliding carelessly and without
reason. It will not be the followers of christ that fall, only the members of religions calling them-
selves falsely as “Christians.” For the man of christ cannot be manipulated into manifesting these
devil’s will. Only the corporate member, the “Christian,” the fool pretending wisdom may be
manipulated into Þghting over whose Þctional title is best. We see the false light of Lucifer alive
and well as it is broadcast through the airwaves of Christian broadcasting networks, where only
the slimiest of evangelicals are put forward to sell nothing of the Word of God, guiding fools
further into the public, debtor’s prison of mammon and legalism.

At what point does skepticism, in the form of learned nihilism, become a disease of the mind?

In the early 1980Õs, Jean Baudrillard had what I consider to be the most poignant answer to this
question, which reveals the metamorphosis of nihilistic thought patterns throughout recent history.
And as with many movements, the original is often sincere or preservative, while the later empty
copies (such as the anarchist of today) stem from what is already lost long ago. Today anarchy is
reduced to a mere fashion statement, its symbols being about equally empty and meaningless as
the cross. For while the ßatteringly titled, corporate ÒChristianÓ wears the cross (jewelry) for public
show precisely because he is Òa sinnerÓ and certainly not following christÕs teachings in the Bible,
the anarchist wears the infamous anarchy symbolism and ßattering title precisely because he is not
practicing anarchy in any way. And so here is BaudrillardÕs expression of the precession of nihilism
from what had meaning to what destroys all meaning to what is a complete emptiness of clarity:

—=—

“We are in a new, and without a doubt INSOLUBLE, position in relation

to prior forms of nihilism: Romanticism is its Þrst great manifestation:
it, along with the Enlightenment's Revolution, CORRESPONDS TO
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE ORDER OF APPEARANCES.
SURREALISM, DADA, THE ABSURD, AND POLITICAL NIHILISM
ARE THE SECOND GREAT MANIFESTATION, WHICH
CORRESPONDS TO THE DESTRUCTION OF THE ORDER OF
MEANING. The Þrst is still an aesthetic form of nihilism (dandyism),
THE SECOND, A POLITICAL, HISTORICAL, AND METAPHYSICAL

!161
FORM (TERRORISM). These two forms no longer concern us except in
part, or not at all. THE NIHILISM OF TRANSPARENCY IS NO
LONGER EITHER AESTHETIC OR POLITICAL, NO LONGER
BORROWS FROM EITHER THE EXTERMINATION OF
APPEARANCES, NOR FROM EXTINGUISHING THE EMBERS OF
MEANING, NOR FROM THE LAST NUANCES OF AN
APOCALYPSE.”
—Excerpt from: ‘Simulacrum and Simulation’, by Jean Baudrillard, Page 151-152

—=—

First there was romantic or revolutionary anarchy (nihilism), which sought to destroy the
appearance of order and the antiquated aesthetics of it. Second, there was political anarchy
(nihilism), which sought to take away any strict meanings in politics, law, and in religion, where
Baudrillard refers to the death of God in many aspects of society, and more importantly the
consequences of the resulting calculated, dialectical annihilation of the Law of God from legalistic
society. And Þnally, Baudrillard presents the present time as that which is after the apocalypse, a
word that means information or knowledge. In other words, once the original meaning of things
and words has been lost, new and even opposing meanings could then become normalized into
such Godless societies. The absence of Existence and a God and Creator of Law from the Law is the
nihilists wet dream, for then even the self-Existent Laws of Nature might be said to not Exist. And
so the very fundamentals of Law may also be altered into promoting the Þction over the Reality
and Nature of that which was the intended meaning of even the word “God” (Jehovah).

If I were to venture a guess, I’d say that the answer to this question as to when skepticism becomes
a disease of the mind is, well… at about the same point where the blind acceptance of legalism
(organized anarchy) and also the false doctrines of corporate religions as artiÞcial reality does. For
again we see a common distinction between these three groups of the partakers of the fruit of that
tree of useless knowledge, which is a purposeful ignorance of the principals of both Nature’s Law
and Existence as God. The many legally identiÞed denominations of religion, as artiÞcial persons,
have no power over the legal realm because they are completely broken away from the
foundational principals of the Bible that would defeat such artiÞcial systems of law. They are ruled
by artiÞce and the Þctions of man's law, just as any other legal person. In fact, as with the Catholic
and Mormon corporations, the more such a false doctrine as the notion that christ is not attainable
but through the corporation of the church and its president/prophet or pope, the more proÞtable in
mammon (tribute/tithing) that corporation (artiÞcial church) becomes.

Of course, the only self-titled “anarchists” I’ve ever met are steeped in the same public performance
debts, social security scheme, drivers license, and other forms of legal id-entity that in fact prove
their legal existence, while they pay the same taxes for that voluntary legal existence and
protectionism to the god of mammon, from sales tax to property tax. In short, these groups are all
defeated by the legal realm of Caesar, and all for the same reason. They all ignore, don’t know,
and/or voluntarily stand in ignorance of the scripturally based principals (maxims) of Law. They
are all acting in false personas, and so the whole of the Law is thus broken. They fail and are in
bondage due to a lack of knowledge, as Moses decreed about his own people. Our foundation and
link to our own Source, our Origin (Creation) into God's Nature, is destroyed by Þctional means.

So what exactly is a skeptic?

PYRRHONISM - noun - [From Pyrrho, the founder of the sceptics.] SCEPTICISM;

UNIVERSAL DOUBT. (Webs1828)

!162
 PYRRHONIST - noun - A sceptic; ONE WHO DOUBTS OF EVERY THING. (Webs1828)

SKEPTIC, or SCEPTIC - noun - [Gr. from to look about, to consider, to speculate. See Show.] 1.
ONE WHO DOUBTS THE TRUTH AND REALITY OF ANY PRINCIPLE OR SYSTEM OF
PRINCIPLES OR DOCTRINES. In philosophy, a Pyrrhonist or follower of Pyrrho, the
founder of a sect of sceptical philosophers, who maintained that NO CERTAIN
INFERENCES CAN BE DRAWN FROM THE REPORTS OF THE SENSES, AND WHO
THEREFORE DOUBTED OF EVERY THING. 2. In theology, A PERSON WHO DOUBTS
THE EXISTENCE AND PERFECTIONS OF GOD, OR THE TRUTH OF REVELATION;
ONE WHO DISBELIEVES the divine original of the christian religion. SUFFER NOT
YOUR FAITH TO BE SHAKEN BY THE SOPHISTRIES OF SCEPTICS. (Webs1828)

—=—

As with most movements against Truth, skepticism is just another false religion once called
Pyrrhonism. Encyclopedia Britannica explains:

“Pyrrhon Of Elis, Pyrrhon also spelled Pyrrho (born c. 360 bc—died c. 272) Greek philosopher
from whom Pyrrhonism takes its name; he is generally accepted as the father of Skepticism.”

“Pyrrhon was a pupil of Anaxarchus of Abdera and in about 330 established himself as a
teacher at Elis. Believing that equal arguments can be offered on both sides of any
proposition, he dismissed the search for truth as a vain endeavour. While traveling with an
expedition under Alexander the Great, Pyrrhon saw in the fakirs of INDIA an example of
HAPPINESS FLOWING FROM INDIFFERENCE TO CIRCUMSTANCES. He concluded
that MAN MUST SUSPEND JUDGMENT (practice epochē) ON THE RELIABILITY OF
SENSE PERCEPTIONS and simply live according to reality as it appears. Pyrrhonism
permeated the Middle and New Academy of Athens and strongly inßuenced philosophical
thought in 17th-century Europe with the republication of the Skeptical works of Sextus
Empiricus, who had codiÞed Greek Skepticism in the 3rd century AD. Pyrrhon’s teaching
was preserved in the poems of Timon of Phlius, who studied with him.”

—Encyclopedia Brittanica Online, entry for ‘Pyrrhon Of Elis, Greek Philosopher’

—=—

The pure skeptic has no foundational Truth, and therefore no True Law, and thus no way to Live
peaceably and in harmony among other men. His election, his mind, and his moral compass is
never sure, and so he may never Þnd Natural Freedom, a term that requires belief in (Love of) God,
a Creator of Nature and what is self-existent Truth. As with many movements and concepts ßoat-
ing around out there, we of course Þnd even the concept of this twisted nihilistic thought in the
Bible. The following verse reinforces a common lesson of the scriptures, which teaches us to remain
in True nihility (a verb meaning no-THING-ness) towards man's law and nations, and towards
names, numbers, and titles when following christ in Piety. But this is not at all the same as standing
in a pretended, cultural anarchy (the noun/title nihilism) towards the Law of God (Existence) as
such. For while the anarchist claims to be some thing, the True follower of christ is humbly no thing.
This difference must be understood as the difference between what is labeled as True christianity
and as anarchistic satanism (adversarial-ness) to the Word (Son/Law) of NatureÕs God. For while
the typical titled “Christian” is disillusioned into believing he is doing the right thing by claiming
to be some thing (a “Christian”), when the Bible Law is put next to that man’s everyday actions, the
shoe of one that is adversarial to God's Word (Son/Law) certainly Þts in most instances. For to
think of oneself as a “Christian” is to think of oneself as some thing as well.

!163
 —=—

“For if A MAN think himself to be someTHING, when he is noTHING,

HE DECEIVETH HIMSELF. But let every man PROVE HIS OWN
WORK, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and NOT IN
ANOTHER.”
—Galatians 6: 3-4, KJB

—=—

This means to take no names, ßattering titles, or any other proprietary mark or sign (artiÞcial
things) of the artful law of man's realms (the world) of Þction; that one should always be exactly
what one was born as into Existence, which is as no thing, not some thing (noun/name). For
instance, no man following christ in Law would think of himself as a ÒMethodist,Ó a ÒBaptist,Ó or a
ÒCatholic,Ó for these are corporate, legal things (names/nouns) of the world (ßesh). They are
pretended id-entities, not self-evident Truths. They are not Creations of God. But for the skeptic,
the nihilist, as the anarchist against all law, this battle is already lost, for these ßattering titles already
deÞne them as some thing they are not. For as hard as it may be for some to succumb to this self-
evident Truth, NatureÕs Law and Design Exists and cannot be defeated, lest one defeats oneÕs Self.

And letÕs face facts here, this modern title of ÒanarchistÓ is not unique. It is someone else's creation,
birthed by the imaginations of men. To think oneself to be an ÒanarchistÓ or for that matter any
denomination of man's religion is to place oneself under the title of an imagined thing that does not
Exist in Reality, neither to the senses in Nature or as a True substance and part of Life. Like the
ÒChristian,Ó the ÒatheistÓ declares himself to be in such a non-self-existent ßattering title (a thing/
noun) only because he cannot otherwise prove his own Self to Exist as such in Reality, the nihilist
also seeming to forget that he should be skeptical about even his own Existence, strange as that
may be. He needs words to show his title, for he may stand nowhere in Nature and prove It or he
himself does not self-Exist. His legal id-entity, his legal existence, and his use of money and
registration of property defeats his words and ßattery of title by that public show. He follows the
law that apparently does not Exist, while longing to Þnd the Natural Law that also apparently does
not Exist. His use of the admixed surname of the state in his commercial signature declares his True
intent and sophistication, and his actions therein under that law prove his belief in (love of) the
false existence and force of the laws of men. Ironically, as the Bible teaches, only his non-use of these
persons, places, and things (nouns) and titles would prove his True Existence outside of such legal
systems of law and corporate religion. He practices not what he preaches any more than the
incorporated ÒChristianÓ does, simply because he is attempting to do the impossibleÉ he cannot
prove a negative. He cannot prove non-belief or non-existence.

What is most amazing is that, despite the arrogant and greedy hold upon their own ßattering titles,
they all seem to be searching for the same thing. But none of them are able to Þnd the True know-
ledge under the True Law of Nature in the scriptures because their false perceptions of themselves
and their member-ships with adversarial Þctions will not allow the Bible Word (Law) to Exist or be
followed in their minds. But no surprise here, as this has been the master plan for the multitude
from the beginning of religions and lawmakers. For if all men knew and under-stood the highest
foundations of the Natural Law, no man would fall prey to the Þctions of law created by men
playing gods.

So I am not to call myself as a ÒChristianÓ (thing/noun) any more or less than I am to call myself an
ÒanarchistÓ or ÒatheistÓ (things/nouns), these being equal sins, for these are Truly and clearly not
self-Existent names. They are obviously not Creations of Jehovah, being wholly the words of man.
Instead, I am to Live as and by the Law of that which I Truly Am. What am I? I AM, and I AM
nothing else but the I AM (a Being in self-Existence), bound by no trick or words of the arts of men. I

!164
am born innocent without name and thus without contract, without (outside of) the terms of art
created under man's law. Quite simply, if I accept none of these names, titles, and other
identiÞcations from man's legal and religious realms, then no law created by man in any legal
capacity may be applied to me (I Am), as all of man's law is proprietary and attached only to the
property (person and title) I might otherwise allow myself voluntarily to be in agency and surety
with. A man with no legal persona has no legal capacity. The only True be-lief in (love of) God is
the be-lief in (love and respect of) nothing else but God (Reality). All other beliefs are necessarily
false, having no foundation in Reality. They cannot be shown to Exist without Þctional words and
laws, and then only by forced application and use of them by men in agency. Anti-Life is not Life.
Representation is not True presence. Appearance is the opposite of absence, and nothing merely
appears without substance in Reality. In Nature, that which is seen in form can only be the result of
some True substance. In Þction, no substance need effect the artful forms therein, but persons
(form) cannot Þctionally live without the substance of man operating them in commerce.

SEEM - verb intransitive - 1. TO APPEAR; to make or have A SHOW OR SEMBLANCE. Thou

art not what thou seems't. Shak. All seem'd well pleased; all seem'd, but were not all. Milton. 2.
To have the APPEARANCE OF TRUTH OR FACT; to be UNDERSTOOD AS TRUE. It
seems that the Turkish power is on the decline. A prince of Italy, it seems, entertained his
mistress on a great lake. Addison. - verb transitive - TO BECOME; TO BEFIT… (Webs1828)

—=—

It is important to remember that what is agreed to be under-stood in law causes it to be legally true.
Like in the cartoon realm, where everything is a false image made to appear as Real, those Þctions
are the truth of that cartoon. So too are the Þctional persons of government true in the legal realm.
But never are these ÒthingsÓ the actual Truth of that which is of the Nature of self-Existence (GodÕs
Creation).

So does a rainbow Exist? How about a mirage in the hot, distant sand?

The words (names) of these phenomenon are certainly false (artful), as all words of man are. Our
vulgar belief or non-belief in these phenomenon is not required by God, for these Natural
phenomenon need no such belief (love or hate) by men to Exist. They are self-Evident, and our
knowledge and contemplation of them must be so as well. It is only when we attach fables and
unfounded mystery to such glorious spectacles in Nature and worship those Þctions that they
become the artful stories of their former Glory, turning what is sacred (Real) into what is cursed
(not of God). This is when True Love dies, for True Love can only Exist in and upon what is of
Nature, of Reality, not on what it is replaced by in false belief. And of course, the mythical pot of
gold at the end of the rainbow causes men to chase after that which they can never acquire, by
seeking the end of Nature (Existence), a parable that Truly covers all pursuits in mammon.

Of course, this is a far cry from scriptural teaching:

—=—

“And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may
remember THE EVERLASTING COVENANT BETWEEN GOD AND
EVERY LIVING CREATURE of all ßesh that is upon the earth.Ó
—Genesis 9:16, KJB

—=—

In Reality, in Nature, since these titles (words) simply do not Exist self-evidently, man should never
think of himself or any other part of the Reality of Nature as merely some ÒthingÓ (name). I Am
nothing… This is the Þrst principal of the Natural Law, the Þrst foundational Law of spiritual Self-

!165
governance, that we should be the property of no man and no other god. To legally name anything
is to make it into pretended property, at which point nothing that suffers those legal words of art
applied to it may remain solely in the ambiguity and Law of God's Nature. Not surprisingly, a
public citizen-ship of any nation is also considered in law as a thing (noun/name), not as a Living
man of God. The Latin word res, as in resident, translates to thing. To carry one's own burdens is to
bear responsibility for all of one's own actions with no thing of insurance, and never to place blame
or burden onto another, especially upon the insured Þctional persona (property) of another. It is to
always blame oneself, never one's legal, ßattering title as an excuse. In other words, be no thing
that you are not and consider others by no thing that is not of Reality, treating all men the same
without exception and without respect of persons and titles. This is the Natural Law of equity and
equality, which is completely opposite to the twisted legal versions of these words regarding
persons (property) as Þctional slaves of the state. Every man Is (I Am) and should not be considered
as anything else but an equal man (part of the I Am), an equal part of the whole Oneness of
Existence that must be worshiped, supported, and protected as such, and thus we are to treat each
other with only Love and Charity, as we expect all others to treat us. Let your Self not be divided
by the false doctrines and inventions of the laws of men that seed to separate each of us from that
Oneness of Source, for only if men are elevated by artiÞcial status in Þctional places can any man
become a god and oppositional lawmaker. And from this realm of false things is birthed the
“Christian,” the “atheist,” and the “anarchist.”

This concept of nihility (no-THING-ness) is a wonderful sentiment for the soul, to be sure, but
under no circumstances should it be translated or twisted into the same mentality as modern
nihilism and/or anarchy, for the ÒRulerÓ and Its Law is through Jesus christ, which is the Word
(Son) of that Ruler. Here we can Truly see why the term Jesus christ is translated to Jehovah is
salvation, as this makes all arguments against christ petty and without merit. For Nature (God)
alone is not salvation, but that of Nature’s Law being in control of every aspect of each man's
actions. This is a huge and in fact opposing difference, for the anarchist believes in (loves) the
random chaos of Nature, not Its permanence of Design and Law. Nature alone is not salvation, any
more than Law alone is such. Law without empathy towards all Creation is pointless, while living
in Nature without respect of Its Law is merely anarchy.

Again, the problem is not “God,” it is that we have never been shown the meaning of that word.
The disagreement on who, what, why, when, where, and how God Exists is a complexly debated
but ultimately simple identity problem. Debates are not fact checks, but instead opinion-based
rhetoric without grammar, with each opinion being public propaganda, not scriptural knowledge.
And so the ÒChristianÓ calls the worshiping of Nature as One God a blasphemy, even as they
ludicrously and against scripture worship Jesus christ as God (Creator)! Meanwhile, the atheist
believes religiously in the non-Existence of both Jesus and Jehovah despite their place within Its
Oneness, again due to not knowing the very deÞnition of those words. And Þnally the anarchist,
being often a result of atheism, generally worships only the Self as God, celebrating the Lawless-
ness of a Godless Nature.

We Þnd further evidence that modernist anarchy is a form of nihilism a bit further in history, in
William C. AndersonÕs 1889 deÞnitions:

NIHILIST - 1. ONE WHO DENIES THAT ANYTHING CAN BE KNOWN OR SHOWN TO

EXIST. See Nihil; Oath. 2. In Russia, a member of a secret society WHOSE AIM IS THE
OVERTHROW OF AUTHORITY AS AT PRESENT CONSTITUTED, the ulterior view of the
more advanced members being the establishment of a SOCIALISTIC or COMMUNISTIC
republic. See ANARCHY; COMMUNISM; GOVERNMENT. (WCA1889)

ANARCHY - The ABSENCE OF GOVERNMENT; a state of society in which THERE IS NO

LAW OR SUPREME POWER. ÒIf a conspiracy had for its object THE DESTRUCTION OF
THE LAW AND GOVERNMENT, it had for its object the bringing about of PRACTICAL
ANARCHY. And when murder has resulted from the conspiracy and the perpetrators are on
trial for the crime, whether or not they were anarchists may be a proper circumstance to be

!166
 considered in connection with other circumstances, with a view of showing what connection, if
any, they had with the conspiracy and what were their purposes in joining it.”… (WCA1889)

—=—

Historically, as so many modern concepts, we Þnd that the term nihilism was probably coined by
Russian novelist Ivan Turgenev in 1862 within his novel Fathers and Sons, though some give credit
for its use earlier in that century. It was a word coined to describe the views that Turgenev
attributed to the younger crowds of intellectually driven critics of feudal society under the Tsarist
(czar, autocracy). And so it is no wonder that this anarchist, nihilistic opinion is regaining
popularity today, as the feudal nature of the pirate nations becomes more comprehendible, and as
more and more people are turned away from the Bible because they are turned off by the various
false religions that pretend It sacred yet have abandoned completely Its Law.

At the end of his book, Baudrillard waxes philosophical the current state of this post-apocalyptic
society where nihilism is surpassed by actual disappearance, that we are the Living ends to the
means, the very purpose of the nihilist, anarchist (as non-Existence) coming True.

—=—

“But more deeply, there is… A MELANCHOLY ATTACHED TO THE SYSTEM ITSELF, ONE
THAT IS INCURABLE AND BEYOND ANY DIALECTIC (LOGIC). It is this melancholia of
systems that today takes the upper hand through the ironically transparent forms that
surround us. IT IS THIS MELANCHOLIA THAT IS BECOMING OUR FUNDAMENTAL
PASSION. It is no longer the spleen or the vague yearnings of the Þn-de-siecle soul. IT IS NO
LONGER NIHILISM EITHER, WHICH IN SOME SENSE AIMS AT NORMALIZING
EVERYTHING THROUGH DESTRUCTION, THE PASSION OF RESENTMENT
(ressentiment). No, melancholia is the fundamental tonality of functional systems, OF
CURRENT SYSTEMS OF SIMULATION, of programming and information.
MELANCHOLIA IS THE INHERENT QUALITY OF THE MODE OF THE
DISAPPEARANCE OF MEANING, of the mode of the volatilization of meaning in
operational systems. AND WE ARE ALL MELANCHOLIC. Melancholia is the BRUTAL
DISAFFECTION that characterizes our saturated systems. Once the hope of balancing good
and evil, true and false, indeed of confronting some values of the same order, once the more
general hope of a relation of forces and A STAKE HAS VANISHED. Everywhere, always, the
system is too strong: hegemonic. The more hegemonic the system, the more the imagination is
struck by the smallest of its reversals. The challenge, even inÞnitesimal, is the image of a chain
failure. But such a sentiment is Utopian. Because IT WOULD BE BEAUTIFUL TO BE A
NIHILIST, IF THERE WERE STILL A RADICALITY — AS IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE A
TERRORIST, IF DEATH, INCLUDING THAT OF THE TERRORIST, STILL HAD
MEANING. THERE IS NO LONGER A STAGE, NOT EVEN THE MINIMAL ILLUSION
THAT MAKES EVENTS CAPABLE OF ADOPTING THE FORCE OF REALITY — NO
MORE STAGE EITHER OF MENTAL OR POLITICAL SOLIDARITY… All of that comes to
be annihilated on the television screen. WE ARE IN THE ERA OF EVENTS WITHOUT
CONSEQUENCES (AND OF THEORIES WITHOUT CONSEQUENCES). THERE IS NO
MORE HOPE FOR MEANING.”

ÑExcerpt from: ÔSimulacrum and SimulationÕ, by Jean Baudrillard, (Page 154-156)

—=—

In essence, Baudrillard is stating here that the goal of the anarchist, of the nihilist, has already taken
place. Apocalypse… And when we consider the pushing of such modes of spiritual death such as
artiÞcial intelligence, virtual and augmented reality, quantum physics and computing, the multi-
dimensional and holographic universe theories, singularity theory, and of course active trans-
humanism, we can fathom therein our own melancholia towards that which, within the Laws of

!167
Reality, of God, and of Nature, ought to be rejected outright from our conscious state of spiritual
Being. The closer we get to and indeed become part of technology the more nihilistic our thought
patterns become, for what is more dead than that which is a creation of man.

—=—

“…we will multiply our effective intelligence a billion fold BY

MERGING WITH THE INTELLIGENCE WE HAVE CREATED.”

“We will connect our neocortex wirelessly to the cloud, just the way
your cellphone does it. Most of the things you do with that do not take
place in the phone, they connect to the cloud. The cloud is PURE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. It is doubling in power every year as
we speak.”



“And so we will be a hybrid of biological thinking and non-biological
thinking, which I believe has already started with these devices outside
our body. And we’ll become smarter. By 2045 WE WILL EXPAND OUR
INTELLIGENCE A BILLION-FOLD…”
—Ray Kurzweil, inventer, author, and futurist (separate quotes)

—=—

Let us be clear… intelligence is not knowledge. Intelligence is not Truth. And man-made
intelligence that holds the absence of any Natural quality is certainly adversarial to self-Existence
(God). Perhaps in this way Kurzweil is the most genius example of all fools; a xenophobe to his
own Source of Life.

This, perhaps, is one of the most antichrist, anti-God, anti-Nature statements ever made by any
man. Again, intelligence is not knowledge. InÞnite intelligence without foundational knowledge
and without the bounds of moral Law is perhaps the most frightening possible state of hu-man
consciousness, robotic and extremely logical without the slightest of spiritual balances. This is
psychopathy turned popular science. This is the tower of Babel on steroids, not merely a fruit
plucked from the tree of knowledge but the whole damned forest in one pill.

Information is, of course, computer code. But computer code is not in any way True knowledge.
Code is another word for language, words. And so when we are governed (controlled) by such a
wirelessly accessible code of language from the cloud, will our public ethnicity still be United States,
or a virtual dwelling in an IBM matrix? Will we still have a physical street address, or just a digital
IP address? What will happen to schools? To library books? To teachers? Somehow man will
increase his intelligence with intelligence that man himself created, an instant download from the
mainframe. But what does that mean? What circular feedback wave would that cause in one’s
capability for mental and moral reasoning? What is the end user agreement going to say? And
what could such massive tomes of hu-man created information, squared ad inÞnitum, possibly
lead man to but his own created, spiritually dead hell on earth? The ultimate self-concept, a self-
deception that can only be described as the simulation of virtual reality as in The Matrix?

MELANCHOLIC - adjective - [See Melancholy.] 1. DEPRESSED IN SPIRITS; AFFECTED

WITH GLOOM; dejected; hypochondriac. GRIEF INDULGED TO EXCESS, has a tendency
to render a person melancholic. 2. Produced by melancholy; expressive of melancholy;

!168
 mournful; as melancholic strains. Just as the melancholic eye, Sees ßeets and armies in the sky.
3. Unhappy; unfortunate; causing sorrow; as accidents and melancholic perplexities. - noun -
One affected with a gloomy state of mind. [Melancholian, in a like sense, is not used.] 1. A
gloomy state of mind. (Webs1828)

MELANCHOLY - noun - [Gr. black, and bile; Latin melancholia.] 1. A gloomy state of mind,
often A GLOOMY STATE THAT IS OF SOME CONTINUANCE, OR HABITUAL;
depression of spirits induced by grief; dejection of spirits. This was formerly supposed to
proceed from a redundance of black bile. Melancholy when extreme and of long continuance,
is a disease, sometimes accompanied with partial insanity. Cullen deÞnes it, partial insanity
without dyspepsy (indigestion). In nosology, MENTAL-ALIENATION RESTRAINED TO A
SINGLE OBJECT OR TRAIN OF IDEAS, IN DISTINCTION FROM MANIA, IN WHICH
THE ALIENATION IS GENERAL. Moon-struck madness, moping melancholy. - adjective -
Gloomy; depressed in spirits; dejected; applied to persons. Overwhelming grief has made
me melancholy. 1. Dismal; gloomy; habitually dejected; as a melancholy temper. 2.
Calamitous; afßictive; that may or does produce great evil and grief; as a melancholy event.
The melancholy fate of the Albion! The melancholy destruction of Scio and of Missolonghi!
(Webs1828)

CALAMITOUS - adjective - 1. Very miserable; involved in deep DISTRESS; oppressed with

INFELICITY; wretched from misfortune; applied to men. 2. Producing distress and misery;
making wretched; applied to external circumstances; as a calamitous event. 3. Full of misery;
distressful; wretched; applied to state or condition. (Webs1828)

DEJECTION - noun - 1. A casting down; depression of mind; melancholy; lowness of spirits,

occasioned by grief or misfortune. 2. Weakness; as dejection of appetite. 3. The act of voiding
the excrements; or the matter ejected. (Webs1828)

—=—

The absolutely insane economic model of governments today is expansion without purpose or
limit, based on mathematical equations that suggest the economy (a Þctional entity in artiÞcial
valuation of mammon) must continue to grow, grow, grow at any cost. This is akin to allowing a
cancer to spread throughout the body because the consensus of medical science declared cancer as
a good thing. The economy is just information. It is an endless Þnancial (artiÞcial) intelligence, the
god of mammonÕs wet dream. And it is at the heart of the big legal lie.

Consider also for a moment our so-called entertainment programming of today: war simulations,
robot armies taking over humanity, viral ßesh-eating zombies, apocalyptic settings, aliens invading
and destroying the world, ourselves destroying our own world, deadly plague and ßu epidemics,
vampires, monsters, parasitic infections, and all sorts of futuristic tales of how technology or forced
evolution (or both combined) will kill us or at least absorb us into its mainframe for the AI's plea-
sure, disposal, and towards the furtherance of its cloud of collective knowledge. We are bombarded
with such nihilistic misery on every channel and on every airwave and on every station. We are
continuously shown counter-culture propaganda while being re-educated in our perceptions of
history, Truth, Nature, and thus the True meaning of God and even our own Nature. Our news
channels actually compete to tell the best received opinions, lies, and commentary without actually
reporting anything True and certainly of no consequence while they advertise end-of-the-world-as-
we-know-it products like gold and silver, storable foods, and other ÒsurvivalÓ wares. Governments
are bombarding us with advertisements for earthquake and other natural disaster preparedness,
while at the same time passing draconian laws just in case these disasters actually happen. Crimes
are well-known in government and religious institutions and yet completely un-investigated and
unanswered, committed without consequence even when reported on by the news agencies. We are
being genetically and mentally altered at a level only describable from the psyche of whatever it is
we are becoming. And we are prescribed pharmaceutical drugsÉ not to cure any proÞtable, 




!169
patented disease, but to temporarily carry us through what should otherwise be causing us to have
a mental breakdown. The drugs make the misery of that melancholic life in third person barely
tolerable.

The solution is obvious, for the word solution means end of contract. In other words, ceasing
contact with whatever the disease is. End of participation. End of respect. In other words, the
solution is to stop listening, stop watching, stop playing, stop pretending, stop lying, and stop
being dependent upon that system of self-mutilation and blood-annihilation. But most importantly,
with the old revolution facilitated by anarchy and nihilism against not only the appearance but
especially the meaning of the word “God,” which was obfuscated only so to be replaced by
immoral art, artiÞce, and now into an on-grid technological wasteland, this annihilation and
irradiation of respect for the God of Existence and Its Word from the standards and practices of law,
education, and from the workplace necessarily spell the annihilation of our very own Selves. There
is no place to go under man’s law but down from here, for nihilism allows no other passage or
escape but non-existence. It allows only implosion.

ANNIHILATION - noun - 1. The act of REDUCING TO NOTHING OR NON-EXISTENCE;

or the act of destroying the form or combination of parts under which a thing exists, SO
THAT THE NAME CAN NO LONGER BE APPLIED TO IT, as the annihilation of a
corporation. 2. The state of being reduced to nothing. (Webs1828)

ANNIHILATE - verb transitive - [Latin ad and nihilum, nothing, of ne, not, and hilum, a triße.] 1.
To reduce to nothing; to destroy the existence of. No human power can annihilate matter. 2.
To destroy the form or peculiar distinctive properties, so that the speciÞc thing no longer
exists; as, to annihilate a forest by cutting and carrying away the trees, though the timber may
still exist; TO ANNIHILATE A HOUSE BY DEMOLISHING THE STRUCTURE. (Webs1828)

—=—

As public persons, each of our houses, our estates, have been destroyed. We’ve been made
common, general, and removed from a connection to our Source. The private blood right of
inheritance has been annihilated, made to be legally declared as non-existent, and this amounted to
the legal theft of private lands stolen by licensed pirates according to the old, written law. We have
no power to change anything in government if we have no land of our own to be represented. The
landholder is the master, the public person a transient, temporary visitor upon another’s land and
taxed as such. We are in a state of limbo, an illiterate multitude caught between heaven and hell,
equalized by law and by mammon, and all because our capacity to be free men (landholders)
under God has been stripped, our blood made legally unrecognizable as if it does not Exist in
Reality. In essence, it is not that God is dead, for that would spell our own fate as well. It is that we
have voluntarily given up and lost our place IN Jehovah. We left God (self-Existence), not the other
way around, so that we may practice lies in Þction under false, legal gods and in their third
persons. And so we may choose to remain in surety for the property of evil men both governmental
and ecclesiastical, or we may reclaim our True Selves, Being a product (issue) only of God and Its
Nature. We may re-establish heaven or continue devouring ourselves in hell…

Heaven = the Uni-verse.

Hell = the ad-verse.

UNIVERSE - noun - [Latin universitas.] The collective name of HEAVEN AND EARTH, AND
ALL THAT BELONGS TO THEM; THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF CREATED THINGS.
(Webs1828)

ADVERSE - adjective - [Latin adversus, OPPOSITE; of ad and versus, TURNED; from verto, TO
TURN. See Advert. This word was formerly accented, by some authors, on the last syllable;

!170
 but the accent is now settled on the Þrst.] 1. OPPOSITE; OPPOSING; ACTING IN A
CONTRARY DIRECTION; CONFLICTING; COUNTERACTING; as, adverse winds; an
adverse party. 2. Figuratively, opposing desire; contrary to the wishes, or to supposed good;
hence, unfortunate; calamitous; afßictive; pernicious, unprosperous; as, adverse fate or
circumstances. - verb transitive - adversÕ. To oppose. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

It is a foolish question to pose, whether or not heaven or hell Exists. For Heaven is untarnished,
uncorrupted Existence, the realm of Jehovah, as that which ßourishes by the Law of Nature alone.
But to the fool, oneÕs Þrst question would stem from the non-existent, but what if? Where is the
safety and security? What about government? Where are the police? Of course, these are strictly the
thoughts of the adverse (as denizens of this living hell). The Universe polices itself, from the
smallest microphage to the maggot to the constant struggle for balance in neutrality between
Natural predator and prey. Too many predators and the predators starve. Too many prey and the
prey overfeeds, causing imbalance between vegetation and prey, and so the prey starves. Whether
one recognizes this untainted Design of God and Its Law as heaven or not does not negate its
Existence as the only possible heaven (harmony) on earth. It is only when man feigns his own
designs and inventions in a vain attempt to improve on this Perfect, Natural cycle of Life and self-
Existence that this perfect balance, as often volcanically, stormy, and ground-shockingly violent and
unpleasant as it may appear, that Harmony between Law and Life is lost. Man organizes to create
the adverse (hell) with his Þctions, his sciences, his lies, and his craftiness towards supporting and
building them while abusing, polluting, and burning that very Life-support system of Nature, only
to cause his foolish inventions to come into artiÞcial existence. All the substance of heaven
(untouched Nature), from the Naturally occurring and eternally ßowing waterfalls to the deepest
forests to the driest deserts to the random Þelds of wheat and wildßowers and to the ocean habitat
full of colorful Life, this is Jehovah (God) uncorrupted by manÕs artiÞce. This is heaven. The
destruction, disease, and ruin that lies behind each dam and each imaginary corporate border that
we call as pointless progress and society today, these are the realms of the adversaries, of men who
live with-out connection to GodÕs Nature and Law in the adverse (hell), and who may never Truly
know God as the Beauty and Glory of Nature (heaven on earth) It Is. For where else may man Þnd
such a place in the Existence of the Universe (Jehovah) perfectly suited to his needs but upon this
one sanctuary of a planet, a place Created to cause him Life, to feed and cloth him, to rain on him in
the most Naturally ßowing and self-cleansing (distilling) of waters, to allow him the elements
required for his breath in a Naturally occurring, perfectly compounded gaseous atmosphere
present every-where he may Freely travel there in, and to allow him to be a part of what can only
be called as heaven. And the only Real, Natural Law that ever he need follow is merely to never
taint, to never corrupt, and to never disrespect that which gives and sustains his very Life, to keep
Pure his body-vessel with Self-Love within this heaven in every way, both physically and
Þguratively, and to never lie.

Heaven on earth, or as some call it utopia, is not merely a pipe-dream, it is simply the earth in its
harmonious cycle, ßow, energy and functional Design unchanged by man. And so for man to Þnd
heaven, he must merely be reborn into It. He must respect all aspects of its interconnected
Existence. He must follow Its Law. He must do nothing that detunes Natures Harmonious
frequency of Life. And so his Lifestyle must be in constant worship and protection of this beautiful
Existence within Jehovah. This is Eternal Life in heaven.

The organized crime hub of church and state, however, offer this spiritual, heavenly place only as a
reward for those whom obey the false doctrines they have recreated in adversity to the ancient
knowledge of the scriptures, causing you to believe in what is not self-Evident, that heaven is only
attained by physical death from this earth. Like Jehovah (God), the common goyim of the nations
must be made to believe (love) that God is external and separate from themselves and from Its own
Creation, Its Nature, and Its Law, that God is outside of the Universe and not the Universe Itself
(self-Existence), and that only under the artiÞce of legal and ecclesiastical law in obedience to the
men running the church and state may any man attain such a life after LifeÕs end. We must obey

!171
man’s law to be in God’s favor. How ridiculous is that? To seek the favor of God while utterly
disrespecting everything about It’s Existent Creation and Law (including the taking of no other
law/doctrine) makes no sense, no matter how you look at it.



Heaven is not a reward after death, it is a Life Lived in servitude only to God’s foundational Law
and Nature. It is the root of Living gladness, not the ghostly, untouchable dream of the dead. The
Bible is the Law of Life, not death. We have all been turned into walking, spiritually dead monsters,
and we may only Þnd heaven when we return to the Pureness of our Source of Life, unblemished
by legal (anti-God) words and law. This is the True path of a follower of christ.

Though I never would have thought myself to ever say such a thing in my Lifetime, after so much
propaganda and lies from the adverse, I can now see clearly that we must return to Jehovah through
the example of christ (Law). We must return to Nature through the foundational principals of the
scriptural, Natural Law, which prevents all of these anarchical, nihilistic systems from affecting us
Ñ and us from affecting GodÕs Perfect Design of Nature Ñ from Þctionally perpetuating our
spiritual death. We must follow the Word (Son) to escape the anti-Word (antichrist). For no human
power can annihilate matter. And what is Þction but anti-matter? This does not mean that we must
worship helplessly upon our knees to some alter or idol, form, or image of man’s imagination, and
certainly to no king, pope, president, or other antichrist. Quite the opposite! In what seems an
incredible twist of irony, it literally means that we must start worshiping Existence again, as the
very deÞnition of Jehovah (all that is self-Existent) in the Bible, which includes even ourselves
when Pure and untainted by the Þctions of mammon and legalism. We must overcome this satanic
(adversarial) system of nihilism as the Þctional (dead) law of artiÞcial (dead) things and embrace
all of Nature (self-Existence) as the Oneness that is the Living God for which we are but a fractional
and totally dependent part of. We can no longer pretend to be separate entities (legal personas)
from Nature, as if we can Live healthily outside of that which is our own Life-support system of
Jehovah. In short, we must de-tach from the umbilical cord of this legal matrix (artiÞcial womb) of
Þction. For each of our minds, bodies, and souls are slowly dying in Reality while we are plugged
in to these anti-Nature, anti-God, antichrist systems and their opposing laws.

The path of the christ was nothing but a resistance to lies and Þctions, a refusal of contracts and
ßattering titles, and a total disrespect for any persons of man. This is not religion, again, this is the
foundational principals (maxims) of the Highest Law. And it is the foundation of common law, the
abandonment of which leading to all the legal snags and traps we will speak of in this work. In
other words, to follow christ is nothing more and nothing less than to be completely, voluntarily,
and uninhibitedly absent of any legal belief or id-entity. Christ was simply immune from the artful
words of man’s law because he followed only God’s Word (Law without man’s words). And christ
is the story of the potential of each and every man. Christ is not a god to be worshiped as the
modern church doctrines declare, christ is a Source of inspiration and emulation, the very key to
the empowerment of free choice. But unlike the anarchist, who fools himself into thinking that
lawlessness is the path to free choice, the True follower of christ knows clearly that only the
keeping of the foundations of God, of the Law of Nature, can one have the True Natural Freedom
and Law to keep and hold the right to choose. And so while the anarchist will declare it his own
right to choose, though no law of governmental structure is apparent to keep and protect that right
that he plagiarized from scripture and pretended to call it his own idea dragged out of the nihilistic
ether, the follower of christ knows that choice is the essence of the Law, and that his choice must
always be the path of christ under the Law of God. This is called the self-evident Law simply
because no Þction may be allowed to interfere with that choice. If no Þction and lies of men existed,
then the same choice would be made in self-evidence even when standing against the greatest of
liars and deceivers and agents of man’s design matrix.

I wish to be clear here that I am not interested in debating the Þner points of what ÒanarchyÓ is to
each individual practitioner or believer (lover) of what they believe (love) this word-title to mean.
The very fact that no anarchist has the same foundational deÞnition of the word anarchy tells me
that no debate can be allowed, for nothing foundational may come from the doctrines of such
nihilistic thought. One is guided scripturally not to suffer fools lest that foolish inßuence cause

!172
oneself to become a like-minded fool, suffering one’s own vomiting spew of fruitless information
(false knowledge). One cannot discuss the nature of existence with one who pretends existence has
no substance or mean-ing, and so there certainly can be no discussion of any of the foundational
principals of the Law of self-Existence (God’s Nature), for what use is Law without Existence?
Remember, we are only here to Þnd Truth, and Truth is only offensive to lies and liars. I am only
interested in the word anarchy and its intent when created and now mis-used.

What I do wish to put forward here is that while the followers of christ and the Natural Law are
well recognized in lawful standing as the common, foundational Law of the United States and
other nations, as Law unwritten and unenforceable but also inversely non-proprietary and thus
non-sanctionable, anarchy in any form, name, or ßattering version or title will always and only
ever be considered as a conspiracy against the current constituted government of People. This
fact is inescapable. No matter how appealing and fallaciously logical you can make it sound,
anarchy will only ever be deÞned as an attack on the current system and government in place, and
the government and its military is there to protect the People (landholders) from exactly that,
making anarchist thought an exercise in futility. It is a losing proposition in every way imaginable.
It may only lead to defeat or worse for its practitioner. And at worse, it will turn entire nations into
melancholic wastelands of moral impropriety as we see today, the result of empty revolutions
leading to the exact nowhere that only nihilism may lead to. These so-called revolutions towards
the celebration of non-existence lead instead to a governmental presence unlike any other in
history, an organized, criminal syndicate and protection racket that relabels the anarchical law-
breakers as the legal lawmakers. For in the end, there is no difference between outright crime and a
legal license to commit unlawful acts that are otherwise unacceptable under the Natural Law.

The Bible says to leave such places, such districts of the cities and nations, and not to stand foolishly
and anarchically opposed to them while at the same time acting under their persona and law. For
one's hatred of a thing is just as powerful as his love of a thing, love and hate being synonymous in
the fact that they imply belief and respect in whatever is loved or hated. These emotional
outpourings are acknowledgments of the false existence and power of artiÞcial things, and yet one
cannot Þght what does not exist in oneÕs own mind. The anger and disdain expressed by the
anarchist towards government is unfortunately also evidence of respect for that Þctional govern-
ment. To invoke its name (word) is to invoke its existence and false authority. But how does an
anarchist Þght that which he cannot name? For to name anything is to acknowledge the power of
that name, an acknowledgment of existence. And so the anarchist, unlike the man following in
christÕs example, is in a constant state of paradox. To imagine something to not exist is never a
default state of thought. In other words, something must be made or said to exist before it can be
said not to exist. So how can I state with any sanity that government does not exist, when in order
to state such a thing I would be invoking and even pointing to some aspect or writings of govern-
ment when I state my declaration of its non-existence? This paradox, this fractal equation could go
on and on forever and end nowhere, which fulÞlls the nihilistic charge that keeps its debate alive.
And so we can say without a doubt that anarchy and its close cousin nihilism are certainly not self-
evident, self-Existent Truths. And this is all that matters, for the Law of Nature leads us away and
protects us from all things that are not self-evident and self-Existent.

And ultimately this is why we are to show only True Love towards our enemies, for only forgive-
ness will heal what is built in hatred and adultery against us. To pull the nihilist back into the
worshiping and belief in Existence, one must offer It to the man carrying that burden of false title.
For the enemy is the title, not the man. The enemy is belief if artiÞcial things and constructs. The
enemy is the lie. Anarchy is not peace, nor is it a peaceful movement by any enemy’s deÞnition. You
may redeÞne it any way you like in your own mind, but your personal deÞnition will not stand in
any form of legal authority over a government’s sovereign authority when you are brought to
stand in legal persona and treason under their laws. Try to see reason here, for the author certainly
recognizes that most who are driven to the anarchy movement have good intentions, but are
suffering from the hopeless, powerless melancholy of nihilism, and so have been directed and lead
away from True knowledge.

!173
As a card-carrying US citizen-ship (property of government), you have to be an absolute fool to
publicly declare yourself at the same time an anarchist (which in action is literally and self-
evidently illegal for US citizen-ships). This dualism is an equal insanity to any US citizen-ship (a
public, proprietary legal person) calling himself at the same time as a True “christian.” Remember,
one's legal identity deÞnes one's pretended highest law and therefore one's god. A man in citizen-
ship cannot be at the same time in anarchy. That would be a paradox. I cannot be in water and also
in the air. At best, the public person may pretend and use that ßattering title of either anarchist or
Christian, but his actions under whatever Law he follows are the only Real proof he has of his True
identity and intention. There simply is no public, legal status of “anarchist.” I’ve not yet met a
single, self-titled “anarchist” that is not also a citizen-ship bound in surety under the doctrine of
master and servant (volunteerism) to the state, any more than I have met a Real follower of christ
that isnÕt faking it in ßattering title while in citizen-ship and member-ship to the antichrist system
of legal law and corporate religions. You can stop making fun of and debating each other as being
fake and full of crap, for you are both equally so. Instead, the both of you need to come to the Bible
scriptures so that you may Þnd knowledge on common ground, which you already have way more
of than you could possibly know. For you are both completely ignorant of what the Word of God’s
Nature is, having both been tainted by the religions of the secular world of mammon, in love and
in hatred thereof.

Remember, this work is not written in judgement of anyone, but only with the same Pure intent of
the allegorical Life and spirit of christ, to save you from your third person self. We all have our
demons, and therefore we must help each other to shed them without hate and judgement. For
right now, ignorance of the Highest, foundational Law is our collective demon, and without that
Word (Law) we may never be free and never defeat the need for the legal matrix to control (govern)
us. We must earn the right to self-govern our own actions, not to vainly promote no government at
all. Either learn to self-govern under the moral law or continue to become accustomed to the ever-
degrading legal law of sin in citizen-ship.

An interesting twist here is that while the Bible tells us never to identify with anything but what is
Real, and to be at Oneness only with Reality (self-Existence) without any exaggerative ßattery or
other lies, at the same time all of these “movements” towards anti-state and anti-religion are
steeped in some ßattering title of identity within that semi-organized, cult-ured group. There seems
to be a sense of unofÞcial member-ship, of wanting to be known by whatever title is being
religiously or non-religiously put forward, be it “atheist” or “anarchist” or even “Christian.” If we
examine this universal trait between them all, we Þnd one common thread. ParadoxÉ For the
“atheist” cannot exist without God. The “anarchist” cannot exist without Law. And the True
“Christian” cannot exist without the Bible. Yet the “atheist” denies God, the “anarchist” denies Law,
and the ÒChristianÓ unwittingly denies the Law of God as exempliÞed by christ in the Bible story,
following instead the doctrines of some denomination or evangelistic adversary on TV. This is a
fascinating look into the power of word magic and into the sophisticated conundrums it can create.
It is the power of our own delusion, as the denial of what is self-evident and self-existent. It is the
contrarian belief in something as nothing and nothing as something.

Again, the intent of this knowledge as it is presented here is not to insult or somehow argue over
what is and what is not “anarchy,” but to show that the word anarchy is for all its intents and
purposes adversarial to the Natural Law of God and thus absolutely not a viable (spiritual) or
obviously a legal/lawful solution. It is by its name antagonistic to law. At its worst, it is the
nihilistic and sometimes suicidal outlook of overwhelming skepticism that God does not Exist, and
that therefore Reality somehow does not Exist, or at least that It cannot be proven to Exist. But as we
will see, the very deÞnition of Jehovah is All that is in self-Existence and which needs no artful
(legal) proof of Existence due to Its self-evidence to the senses! And this we have now found is the
very foundational Law of government, the creator of Þctions! The author here wishes only to stress
that anarchy is a no sum game, having no structure or place to go. It is spiritual death. Lawlessness
is nothingness. And nothing could be more satanic towards the Law of God's Nature than that. If I
choose to follow lawlessness I also choose the god of lawlessness, which ironically will be whatever
devilish man can organize and control (govern) the minds (-ment) of other men to cheat, steal, and

!174
kill for him. The Natural Law of God, inversely, insists upon self-governance according to a very
well laid out and self-evident moral code for all men where Jehovah, through christ, is the ruler;
standing as the very antithesis of anarchy. For christ is the personiÞed Word (Law), not a living
man standing under some crown or ofÞce as an arbitrary ruler. And this ruler Þguratively asks
nothing unreasonable in any way, except that you refrain from trying to be a ruler in Its Name and
that leaders do so without authority and only in good will and Charity towards others, never for
selÞsh, self-beneÞcial intent. This is the idealist Òvoluntary societyÓ so often spoken about by the
confused, by those who havenÕt realized quite yet that they already live in a voluntary society
within the legalism and citizen-ship of the nations. The ÒanarchistÓ and other ßatteringly titled
activists out there, who will always in their lack of governance and organization fail to attain their
utopian dream simply because they have been made to forget what utopia (untainted Nature) and
Its Law is, and they canÕt possibly know what the Law is self-evidently supposed to be because the
only Real Book of Law that rebuts all other doctrines after it has been obfuscated from them.

And so again I must stress here that the nations of today, being de facto (illegitimate), militarized
corporations (artiÞcial persons), are each constituted and standing with immoral, antichrist
licentiousness to commercially operate from its own self-declared sovereignty (lawlessness),
through the authority of its own bloodlines of private People (States united), and by an elect (elite)
voice of gods in the pretense of a legislature or from its king, queen, pope, etc. These nations are a
tool of anarchy, of licensure, which means that the sovereign People these nations protect are
lawless, being above the law they create in their nations for all others (for citizen-ships/public
persons). And through these legal machines of false law they bestow legal rights and permissions
(licensure) to special members (citizen-ships) through syndicalist ßattering titles of employment
(use) and conscription (oath of service), which allows these hirelings, mercenaries, and prostitutes
of government to act in anarchy to all established, written and unwritten law. The nation grants its
own false, unnatural immunity from all Law. This is thus paradoxically a system of organized
anarchy. The lawless gods rule supreme over their own created, nihilist system of law; laws which
can be ignored or redeÞned at the signature of any judge, president, governor, or legislative
consensus. And as for the rest of us in this multitude of illiteracy, we act like animals competing for
the lesser evils (pleasures, privileges, and beneÞts) of this system, following the legal law that
deÞnes our status in society and that rules over whatever our diploma (diplomatic papers of
immunity), licenses, and permits say that our profession may be. And the higher we climb the
corporate ladder, the closer to gods we become, receiving more exemptions and licenses from the
gods of legal law the more morally depraved and impressed by Þction we become. And at the
water cooler we marvel at how the biggest and most deceitful, immoral a-holes get the best pro-
motions, a sign at least that most of us still have some semblance of moral and spiritual capacity
left within us, that perhaps some may be saved by spiritual knowledge and through the Living
Law, the Law of the Living.

If a government gives license (lawlessly issued permission) to kill or commit other crimes against
man and GodÕs Nature, is this not merely an organized form of anarchy against the Highest,
Natural and foundational Law of God, and therefore isnÕt that artiÞcial title of ÒgovernmentÓ just
for public show? Is it not merely mind control (govern-ment) by false doctrines? Cannot lawless-
ness be said to be the same as Godlessness, as we have shown the Bible to be Law and not religion?
To pretend a state of Higher Laws attached to Nature without acknowledgement of a God (Creator)
of that Nature and Its self-evident Law is perhaps the highest form of senseless anarchy, a paradox-
ical law that somehow has no ruler or creator. This oxymoronic view of law, as history has shown,
certainly invites the organized chaos of manÕs syndicalist governments (i.e., anarcho-syndicalism)
of legal law and its inequities of valuation in mammon (anarcho-capitalism) as the replacement god
of the Natural Realm. If anarchy were the problem, government would be its reaction, just as
infection is the reaction to uncured and uncared for open wounds. Government in whatever form is
the inevitable conclusion to any period of anarchy. And yet in a circular fashion, anarchy is a
temporary solution to a totally corrupt government. The only difference between legal, organized
crime controlled by a de facto government and the unorganized state of anarchy is that governments
last much longer in that cycle of empires. The reader should not be confused here, for the author
supports neither legal governments nor anarchy. They are but similitudes of lawless (Godless)

!175
behavior. Anarchy is as a ripe soil awaiting the seed of corruption to blossom in the form of a
permissive, organized criminal syndicate that pretends to be a savior (father), as our so-called
“founding fathers” were in their free-masonic union. Anarchy is only the strict law of the strongest
and most inßuential ßesh, not of the spirit, just as legalism is law without any Higher consideration
but that of man’s i-magi-nations and wants, as a law of permissive lawlessness in reconsideration
and misrepresentation of what God Is. And it only applies to the creations of those legal gods. It is
a state of pretending that the legal name and person (status and title) of man can break God’s
Natural Law as long as he does so legally and while acting (pretending) within that false title and
its licensure, in a false persona that is only a Þctional creation of man. The legal state is a simulated
reality, and as long as its members crimes against God and Nature are pretended to be within its
own Þctional jurisdiction, the crimes are forgiven by licensure (organized anarchy) and by the
pardon of men acting in the artiÞcial legal ofÞces of priest and judge.

A good example of this in science Þction comes from Orson Scott Card with his story of ÒEnderÕs
Game.” I was fortunate enough to have been passed this book at a young age, and it certainly made
an impression on my mind that I would later Þnd to be based very much in the potentiality of
parabolic Reality. In the story, we Þnd that an entire war is being waged through a computer
simulation. But while unknown to the young, brainwashed leader acting agenticly, this was no
simulation. His subsequent defeat of what can only be described as a massive video game in virtual
reality that actually controls a whole Real army and ßeet of drones far away was celebrated not as a
mass genocide of another race of beings, but as a legal, licensed, completely lawless victory in war.
It is only when young, pre-adult Ender becomes aware that this was no game, a non-Þction, that he
had a moral and mental breakdown over the crime against Nature he had committed. On a less
grandiose scale, of course, this is the exact story of every citizen-ship of every nation. The man acts
as something he is not, piloting a drone (legal person) in society and in mercenary employment
(ßattering title) for mammon, while completely brainwashed that this Þctional matrix of legal law
somehow excuses his corrupted actions. All of these ßattering titles of Òanarchist,Ó of Òatheist,Ó and
of ÒChristian,Ó are merely virtual clothing and armor, the false, ßattering titles we wear as we battle
our own God and Nature (Source), just as poor Ender was elaborately brainwashed into believing
in the Þctional realm over his own Reality. This is the story of the perfect agency relationship and
agentic personality, being so far removed from self-responsibility and conscious awareness of the
consequences of one's own actions that the agent may be directed by legally enforced law to
commit unimaginable crimes without moral consideration or restraint.

The reader should know that this author has had several such breakdowns in the creation of this
work. For knowledge cannot enter the mind of those driven by useless information and pursuits in
legalities and in mammon. One must fall in order to climb higher. And so I am spiritually rewarded
for my broken heart in many ways, and the remnant will certainly be a broken-hearts club.

—=—

“The righteous cry, and the LORD heareth, and delivereth them out of
all their troubles. THE LORD IS NIGH (NEAR) UNTO THEM THAT
ARE OF A BROKEN HEART; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.”
—Psalms 34: 17-18, KJB

—=—

“For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge

increaseth sorrow.”
—Ecclesiastes 1:18, KJB

—=—

!176
For the hyper-empathetic man such as myself, these verses can only be called as self-evident.

The Word of God gives no titles to men. More to the point, it allows none to Exist. It suffers no
Þction, no artiÞce, and no false beliefs (love) in what is not of Source (Creation). It is not for Jews,
for Muslims, or for Christians. It is for all men, for all Creation. It seeks for you to obtain no style, no
reward, and no gain, except for that which is preserved as the Pure and untainted Nature
(Creation) of God. And most importantly, It gives no power or authority to any man; no titles and
no crowns, so that we should Live the Law in Love, Charity, Equity, and Piety. This is not in any
way to be compared to or called as Òanarchy,Ó any more than it is to be called as Òreligion.Ó And
that, to me, is the greatest attainment of True (wordless) spiritual knowledge.

To be clear, a system of law that is opposed to the Natural Law is in anarchy towards It. ArtiÞce is
opposed to the Laws of Reality. Make-believe is anarchy to the Real, to the Natural Design of the
eternal Life Source. So do not be confused when the word anarchy is used to describe the law of
nations, or that of the public law that governs only over Þctional persons, places, and things
(names/nouns). To make the claim that anarchy is a word different from what every single
dictionary deÞnes and that the Bible describes it to be is like the devil suggesting that evil is
actually goodness, that darkness (ignorance) is light (knowledge). In this way, the ÒanarchistÓ
movement Þghts a completely unnecessary battle. This battle is not to force its will or intent but
almost entirely to retain their detractors respect for that false, ßattering title of anarchist, a word that
generally does not in any way Þt over their actual organization, intentions, and lifestyle. They
battle to keep their name and ßattering title, with nothing but words as their defense. For their
actions prove in every way that they don’t deserve the title. To claim oneself to be an “anarchist”
while carrying a drivers license and social security card is equally as idiotic and non sequitur as that
same man pretending to be a self-proclaimed ÒChristianÓ while carrying a drivers license and
social insurance number (SIN). For both lawlessness and the Law of God are opposed to the legal
system and its law, and especially to the corporations (artiÞcial persons) pretending True religion
while espousing false doctrine. Remember, the author seeks only the Truth, and the Truth is that to
proclaim oneself as something one is not, in Reality, is the road to voluntary ignorance and slavery.
And the only way to prove such claims of protected or securitized title is within the legal, artiÞcial
realm of man's law. Protection requires subjection. For none of these are of GodÕs Creation, only
man’s, and God's Law of Nature says never to respect what is artiÞcial. ItÕs quite simple on its face.

Either state of pretended being, whether it be forced legal law (licensure) or intentional lawless-
ness, is satanic (adversarial) to GodÕs Law and Nature, period. And so this author will neither
support nor apologize for speaking such self-evident Truth towards either of these chaotic systems.
Legal govern-ment (the organization and mind control of those without Higher Law), is at best a
temporary and perhaps, debatably, even a necessary evil to prevent complete and total anarchy
(unorganized, unlicensed lawlessness). For we must remember that governments are only
organized to govern those without the capacity of self-governance, without self-control, without
sanity, without right mind, without knowledge, and without a Higher Law than that of the ßesh. It
is not so different from the reasons parents guard over and limit their young children not yet of the
right mind to make reasonable, moral decisions for themselves. And it is certainly the same model
as is the military, where the infantry (agents) are controlled under the strict orders of the higher-
level generals (principals) of military law.

In legalistic law, adults are actually deÞned in certain cases as infants no matter how legally old
they are. For infancy is a reference to state of mind and literacy, not speciÞcally to age. The
ÒinfantryÓ is so named because it is the Þrst stage of service, as one becomes movable and expend-
able chattel that are the equivalent to pawns on a chessboard. They need never think for themselves
but only follow direct orders of their master. And if they do have a moral consciousness that causes
them to choose not to follow orders to kill or commit other crimes against Nature, they end up in
the stockade. And so the title of ÒinfantryÓ is certainly a shoe, or black boot, that Þts.

My rhetoric should not be taken in support of such things as the evils of governments, merely as an
unbiased and thus reasonable perspective of those who by design cause us to be not right-minded;

!177
an empathy for the devils, if you will. All men of God may come out of her legal ÒartiÞcial wombÓ
if they choose. But to do so, each one of us must Þrst admit our own defeat, our own place in this
debtorÕs hell, and especially our public-minded illiteracy. We must each comprehend our own
volunteerism induced by trickery and word-magic. One must be able to show what path they seek
to follow, and thus prove strong their election and place upon that path by learning and following
the foundation of Law through conscious action, not by anarchy (lawlessness). The thing about
anarchy is that it cannot be proven to exist in a system built upon the rule of law. It is not evidence
as the Bible is. It has nothing to prove its existence because it respects nothing that respects its
existence. It has no substance or self-evidence. It is literally a pretended system of nothingness that
serves no purpose and cannot be recognized by the gods of that very system of law it seeks to
destroy. To say it is a non sequitur, a non-starter, is less than adequate. To say that it is satanic
(adversarial) to both the moral Law and all systems of man's law is a foregone conclusion. And
under no circumstances should christ be titled as an anarchist. This is foolishness, for the Son is the
very perfection and example to follow of the personiÞcation of the Highest Law.

Sadly, the fallacious, sophist mind will claim that the author just labeled all anarchists as satanists.
But this would be as incorrect as saying that I labeled all Christians as satanists. No man is his title.
To act satanically is not to be a Òsatanist,Ó any more than to act in anarchistic ways is to be an
Òanarchist,Ó or that a follower of christ is a “Christian.Ó An action is a verb , while a title is a noun
(empty name). One has the force of Life and one does not. The self-evident Truth is clear, that
anarchy, atheism, and corporate Christianity (religion) are states of adversarial-ness towards the
Bible. And so just like Ender in his game thought he was acting his best in his simulation and
military title, in the end he realized that his actions were in fact satanic (adversarial) to his True,
moral Self and to the Law that, without trickery and illusion, would have prevented his hand from
annihilating an entire species and planet. Even if the ÒChristianÕsÓ only sin is apathy and inaction
under that ßattering title, his responsibility and failure to prevent those great evils that crop up
around him are the most damning marks on his soul. Inaction and apathy in the face of crimes
against NatureÕs Law and Design are the greatest sins of this world. There is no external form of
satan, there is only the internal demons of the minds of men. And all the Þctions of man are satanic
to all Life and Nature. Hell is man's creation. Hell is art.

But as the only True Law of self-Existence, a Law that would be impossible to ever go away as it is
the Source of Life, the Law of Nature stands strong always and against even the most ardent of
ßatteringly titled “anarchists,Ó Ògovernments,Ó and “religions.Ó It defeats all enemies. For the
choice, the Real debate, is certainly not whether that Law of God Exists, but whether or not one
should choose to follow it. This is the essential difference between the temporary nature of Þction
and the permanence of The Reality of Nature and Its Law. And so governments appear to be
necessary only because the men who created governments purposefully and with ill intent caused
such a void of knowledge and spiritual consideration in the everyday common man, ensuring the
perception of need for government in the Þrst place to control the otherwise lawless masses. Slaves
are governed, but so too are kings self-governed. For despite their self-proclaimed sovereignty
(lawlessness), they are still bound by the duty of the Law of Nature. Their very authority is built
upon it, as hell is built for those who fall from heaven. Every king rules only over those who
voluntarily or through ignorance of GodÕs Law call him father. He rules only over his own property.
And so in the Þgurative eyes of the law of those idolatrous gods, the sovereign rulers of all nations,
all men not governed by GodÕs Law, including those pretending to be atheists, anarchists, Muslims,
Christians, and Jews must be governed by men. For these are only ßattering titles, form without
substance, words without works. And so I tell you again, no matter what you call yourself you will
have a god, or you will become the corrupted idol of god over others. No man is godless, for no
man will be allowed to be lawless without license. This, my friends, is why it appears so hopeless
when we try to escape the authoritarian rule of the gods of the nations, for they portend to touch
every inch of Creation with their magic spellings of jurisdiction. It is not that men may not escape,
it is that persons (art, Þctional existence) can never escape their creators reserve. While a spiritually
driven, Lawful man may reserve all rights from all others, a person (legal status) exists only as
deÞned by its creator (god) and only in its district or other legal realm of artiÞce.

!178
 —=—

“Between the Shaman of the Tungus, the European prelate WHO

RULES CHURCH AND STATE, the Voguls, and the Puritans, on the one
hand, and the man who listens to his own command of duty, on the
other, the difference is not that the former make themselves slaves,
while the latter is free, BUT THAT THE FORMER HAVE THEIR LORD
OUTSIDE THEMSELVES, WHILE THE LATTER CARRIES HIS LORD
IN HIMSELF, YET AT THE SAME TIME IS HIS OWN SLAVE.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Der Geist des Christentums und sein Schicksal [The Spirit of Christianity and its Fate] (1799)

—=—

Neo may escape The Matrix, for he may abandon it, unplug from it. But “Thomas Anderson” can
never leave. For that persona “Thomas Anderson” is the property (program, legal property) of and
has existence only in The Matrix. Whatever was gained in The Matrix through that Þctional persona
cannot be transferred to the Real world, for what is in The Matrix is only coded words and symbols
of no substance in Nature. So too is the story of every man acting in surety to the legal persona
(property) of any national government and its legal matrix code. Property is only words on paper!

Legalistic systems of law stem from the mastery and application of all levels of the Hegelian
dialectic, that is, the utter control of the problem, the reaction to that problem, and to the solution
for that problem. For he who causes reaction in others does so to keep them in distress, which is a
synonym for district. When man is caused to be continuously, customarily, and habitually reactive
in the legal, commercial realm instead of proactive under God's Realm of Nature and Its Law, then
man is doomed to repeat his own habitual, customary history in perpetuity like a rat running on a
wheel in its cage. Of course, in order to keep the multitude in this invisible cage of jurisdiction, the
problem-maker (lawmaker) must hide the solution from its goyim. The gods of the nations thus hid
the True meaning and Word of God in the Bible so as to turn all of that multitude away from the
exit (exodus). And so around and around we go, spinning our wheels in that commercial system of
mammon in pursuit of money (nothingness) and all things (proprietary names) valued in it. We
might as well be plugged into a computer simulation, for the end result would be the same. We can
take nothing we gain legally with us, for it is not ours to begin with. What is legal cannot be con-
trolled by the senses, for what is legal is always without Life and without substance. It is always
non-sense and never self-Existent.

And so just as dams could be said to be necessary evils because their immediate destruction would
unleash the ßoods of untold ruination upon the cities they supply and apparently protect, existing
governments over the public-minded multitude seem to be, for now, an apparently indispensable
design. For the ßood of illiterate men without under-standing of the Law of Nature would be more
devastating than anything else the devil could possibly dream up. It would lead to a sudden,
uncontrolled burst of anarchical madness; an uncontrolled metastasis of Reality as a child suddenly
Þnding himself free of parental guidance. And so the author re-stresses that the only solution is the
spiritual, Natural Law of God, with the comprehension that the deÞnition of this word solution is
only ever “end of contract.” No contract, no dis-ease. In Truth there is no other solution, simply
because the word solution means only the end of contract, or in the case of a citizen-ship, end of
the contractual relationship to the gods of the nations. It is the end of written law of men, not of
the self-evident, unwritten Law (Word) of God. While the anarchist seeks to destabilize the
organized crime and chaos of the current cities and nations, the follower of christ actually walks
away from them, no longer respecting their artful laws and recreations, and proving his right to
self-govern only through his continuous actions under Nature’s Law. But without that Highest
Law, this solution is impossible, for only this Highest Law is recognized as a solution (end of all

!179
contract) by the gods of legalism. It is this Higher knowledge and duty of Law that must be re-
attained and utilized. It is the visible lack of need to be legally controlled (governed) that proves
one's right to Natural Freedom. To “come out of” the cities and of the nations will require know-
ledge and Pure works in True Piety and Charity by all who seek this only Real solution. And this
includes forgiveness, meaning that one cannot sue government in mammon for monetary damages
for one's own volutvarny participation in government. Money is also property of government, and
its use both privately and publicly is bound under the law of the creator of that money. In God’s
priceless realm of Nature, in Reality, that money has no value. To seek reward in mammon while at
the same time seeking reward (Freedom) under God is paradoxical at best. The biggest part of
forgiveness is to forgive one's Self, for then all others must be forgiven, their individual guilt being
only measurable in equality as each of our own. The wealthy and successful elite have risen above
us because that is what the law of man tells them they should do, and because they have no other,
Higher Law. We, even the lowest of us, have all played our own voluntary parts in this evil, anti-
God system of legalism and mammon, and so to blame one actor for being more guilty than oneself
is akin to madness. There simply cannot be a penalty for returning to the Oneness, to the True Self
under God's Realm and Law, only spiritual reward. Guilt is assigned to us at the strawman’s legal
birth, and guilt is conÞrmed and consented to the Þrst time we use that Þctional person, the Þrst
time we signed in its legal name and so chose our false god in mammon. Forgiveness must be
universal to all, for their power ends when we stop respecting that Þctional representation that
pre-tends them and us legal power. It is our duty, not theirs, to cease our respect of their false
personas, lest they continue to swear on oath to be something when they are nothing and remain
under the law of Þction. To Live under GodÕs Law alone is not anarchy (lack of government) but
indeed self-government, as the spiritual control of one’s own Self in upholding the Highest duty of
Law, which ultimately is the only True Proof of one own right of self-Existence. There is no room for
nihilism here, for the god of nothingness and of non-Existence can only ever be the king of lies, of
Beelzebub, the lord (owner) of the ßies and of evil (dead) spirits, the great deceiver and adversary to
Nature’s Existence In and As God. For nihilism is another fallacy that may only exist through
words, and all words are lies when applied against the True Source of Existence.

—=—

“There came also a multitude OUT OF THE CITIES round about unto
Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with
unclean spirits: and they were healed every one.”
—Acts 5:16, KJB

—=—

“And the people saw them departing, and many knew him, and ran
afoot thither OUT OF ALL CITIES, and outwent them, AND CAME
TOGETHER UNTO HIM.”
—Mark 6:33, KJB

—=—

Legalism deals not with Nature or Reality, only with its own legal names (form without substance).
It ignores Real Life and represents it with art. Great fortunes have been made through that art by
using other men as an expendable labor commodity in the legal commerce of slave-labor. Legalism
is thus anarchy against God (Reality), for it Þguratively and nihilistically offends the Creator and
Law of Reality. When all of Nature has a monetary value placed upon It as proprietary legal names,
and when those words are then considered by men as more valuable and real than the Life or other
True substance those names (art) re-present as Þctions of law, we know without a doubt that we are

!180
in hell. We have crossed over and exist only under the god of mammon, for we ourselves see and
respect only Þction, not Reality. We see not the True Nature of GodÕs Creation before us, only Its
comparable valuation in the Þction of money and in its potential of proÞtable gain, where nothing
actually exists to gain from except debt. We value the name and credit score (reputation) over the
well-being and Charitable welfare of all we meet, the Source being ignored to beneÞt the re-source.
This causes permanent indebtedness, for gain harms all others but the one gaining. We live our
civil lives accordingly, in constant pursuit of monetary gain at the expense of others, a spiritually
dead existence. If this is not organized anarchy, this perpetual monopoly game with no winner and
no mutual beneÞt, then I donÕt know what is. And since all things in Nature are re-presented in our
minds as only the valuable consideration of their monetary appearance, we certainly lose our
religion. We cease to follow the Highest, foundational Law religiously. We lose our Charity. We
forget how to Love, lusting only over Þctional persons, places, and things. We take a false god, the
god of mammon (wealth), for we no longer Live proactively in Source. We are tricked into follow-
ing only the law of money in commerce, not the Law of the Source and Design of our own Life and
well-Being in Nature. This is spiritual anarchy; madness controlled by entertaining invention. True
Source becomes only a Lifeless, natural re-source to exploit in the name of proÞt in mammon. We
are purchased (conquered) by that which is adversarial (satanic) to Nature. And so even men are
seen not as equal under God and protectively in Its Nature, but only by our worth as human capital
in the Þctional story of the legal systems of mammon and its management. For when we assume
the name of another, we are no longer acting under God as our True Selves, as GodÕs Creation, and
therefore we are no longer considered by the creator of that false legal name and title as a man
(Creature) of God. We have made the choice to live in the chaos of manÕs designs, and that election
establishes our law under surety and redirects our intent.

I stated before that all men will have a god. But more important to comprehend is that all men will
be slaves to the law of that god. We may choose Life or death in the spiritual realm. We may choose
the God of Nature or the gods of Þction. We may be the slave (agent) of Jehovah or of false gods.
The Law we choose to follow is our evidence of volunteerism (the doctrine of master and servant),
not the name and ßattering title we pretend to be. For man to have dominion over Nature, we must
be voluntarily enslaved to Its Law.

In this way, the allegory of the ÒGarden of EdenÓ was actually a prison, a place of protection or
cover from which the fallacious concepts of good and evil, of useless knowledge, was kept from the
innocence of Life Purely Lived under the Law of God. It was the very deÞnition of utopia, a topiary
to be kept Pure and untainted through the dominion of man.

—=—

“And the LORD God TOOK THE MAN, AND PUT HIM INTO THE
GARDEN OF EDEN to dress it and to keep it.”
—Genesis 2:15, KJB

—=—

“Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to
till the ground FROM WHENCE HE WAS TAKEN.”
—Genesis 3:23, KJB

—=—

The ÒGarden of EdenÓ was a place free from legal dis-ease, a sanctuary free from the laws, designs,
and conceptualizations of men. And so this place, this prison, this shelter and sanctuary from all
artiÞce bound strictly under the Law of Nature and no other is certainly what we must dis-cover

!181
again. It is not something to be built, merely the rediscovery of the no-thing-ness of Nature’s
abundance uncovered from beneath the legal oppression and property of man's law and invention,
where the Law of Nature is never trumped by any usurper, and where man's re-creations Exist in
Harmony with their Source of Creation. The ßow of the self-Existent, self-evident, negative energy,
duty, and Law must remain unhindered and untainted by the positive declarations and designs of
men against the great Blueprint of Nature. It is this place that we must seek together as we escape
from the cities and nations, for such a Pure Life Lived under the Highest Law is the only True
evidence of intent. The second that any legal person, place, thing, ideal, or law is allowed to be
planted as chafe amongst the Pure seeds, the walls of that garden will surely fall.

PARADISE - noun - [Gr.] THE GARDEN OF EDEN, in which Adam and Eve were placed
IMMEDIATELY AFTER THEIR CREATION. 1. A place of bliss; a region of supreme felicity
or delight. THE EARTH SHALL ALL BE PARADISE— 2. HEAVEN, the blissful seat of
sanctiÞed souls after death. This day shalt thou be with me in paradise. Luke 23:43. 3.
Primarily, in Persia, a pleasure-garden with parks and other appendages. (Webs1828)

PARADISEAN, PARADISIACAL - adjective - Pertaining to Eden or Paradise, or to a place of

felicity. 1. Suiting paradise; like paradise. (Webs1828)

FELICITY - noun - [Latin felicitas, from felix, HAPPY.] 1. Happiness, or rather great happiness;
blessedness; blissfulness; appropriately, the joys of heaven. 2. Prosperity; blessing;
enjoyment of good. The felicities of her wonderful reign may be complete. Females - who
confer on life its Þnest felicities. (Webs1828)

—=—

Heaven, paradise, utopia… all of these words lead to the same place. Happiness Exists and subsists
only within the capacity of man, and only Truly manifests when man is in touch with and ground-
ed to his Source, in his own Nature, Being in Oneness with Jehovah and Its Law. This, above all
else, is self-evident Truth. And yet this is the Realm we are kept from because we continue to eat of
the tree of useless knowledge, devouring its Þction and picking clean its offerings. Governments
and religions are their own prisons, barring us all from communing with our Source of Life while
promoting false images and tokens of false value. And we trample upon that Garden, covering it
with cement and steel, redirecting its blood-ßow, and damming up its veins. With utter disrespect
of that which sustains our very Existence, our quest for unspiritual knowledge is leading to what
can only be said to be an extinction level event for many species of Creation.

And yet Creation will go on, whether we save ourselves by the Law (Son) or not. No amount of
preparation will help, for to prepare for a preventable disaster instead of Þghting or even dying to
subvert it and its purveyors is the path of a madman, the way of the goyim. Of course the only self-
evident path in which man can be saved is to return to the Love, Respect, and care for Nature’s
Design. And this is the path laid out in scripture.


I know that many out there seek this seemingly elusive place, searching behind legally corrupted
eyes that cannot see and legally bounded ears that cannot hear. But it is impossible to Þnd what is
covered in such legal designs and jurisdictions, and no persons may tread upon the Realm of the
Real. You are still searching within the names and worded records of cities and counties within
states and nations, all of which cannot Exist in the very untainted Nature you seek. You search
through adversaria, thumbing through page after page within history books that bear no True Life
in them, for they are the timelines of the ever-changing Þctions of men, not the unchangeable
substance and Word of God. The garden eludes you because you are seeking to purchase (conquer)
land in mammon, seeking legal (anti-God) title and privilege by praying to those false legal gods,
and trying to deÞne Its borders through the language arts and fruits of that very same tree of the
conceptual knowledge of good and evil, of useless information, which leads all men away from
that perfection of untainted Nature. But in Truth, Nature has no borders, and so It cannot be found
through such vulgar means. You seek what is priceless for a price and what is timeless for a term.

!182
And so what you seek can never be Truly found, for your spirit has been raped of its ability to
differentiate between Þction and Reality. A man caught up in the hypnotizing air of Þction sees
only through rose-colored glasses, where what lies under the rose remains hidden from the senses,
causing non-sense to logically (fallaciously) make sense. In Truth, the entirety of Earth is your
Garden. It is only what you can be made to believe in (love) and respect that prevents you from
Þnding True pleasure and Life within what is Real.

As the foundation of comprehending this work and in that of all hierarchies of all possible laws, the
reader must Þrst acknowledge not the imaginary existence of some persona or image of God as
presented by corporate religious authorities (church and state), but that the word ÒgodÓ is only an
English (dog-Latin) term, and that in its purest form is only descriptive of all of that Permanent
Existence that lies untouched by manÕs designs, including man himself. Jehovah is Source,
Foundation, Reality; while manÕs (the gods) false creation within the actual Creation of Jehovah is
always secondary and certainly subservient to GodÕs Law of Creation (the Natural Law). When It is
perceived not to be, the good (Heaven) has been turned into evil (hell). Man must choose to enter
the legal realm by abandoning the Natural Realm and Creation of God. Thus our actions in that
false legal nature, our signature and thus respect of the Þctions of law ceremoniously proclaim our
intent to abandon GodÕs Realm and protective Natural Law, and in Its stead to enter the Þction of
legalism and be bound by its anti-Law. Organized religion and its doctrines play no part in this
attainment of True knowledge, nor does government, for church and state are only temporary
creations of man, not of the Permanence of God.

ThatÕs it! ItÕs that simple. It is only your choice as to which of these ÒgodsÓ you seek to worship -
GodÕs Nature or manÕs artiÞcial construct built without and anarchical to It, also known as
mammon. The big legal lie. Just know that you may only have (claim) one God, that Nature only
Exists as untouched by manÕs designs and inventions, and that acceptance of one god (God)
destroys the power, protections, and beneÞts of the other. The legal law requires abandonment of
GodÕs Law of Nature. And GodÕs Law requires abandonment of the respect of all artiÞcial creations
and laws of man. We cannot know any form of law unless we know the substance of Reality and Its
Natural, self-evident Law. We cannot really know anything unless we know and compare what is
opposite.

—=—

“To believe in God is impossible. Not to believe in Him is absurd.”

—Voltaire

—=—

ÒWho hath divided a watercourse for the overßowing of waters, or a

way for the lightning of thunder; To cause it to rain on the earth,
WHERE NO MAN IS; on the wilderness, WHEREIN THERE IS NO
MAN; To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of
the tender herb to spring forth? Hath the rain a father? or who hath
begotten the drops of dew? Out of whose womb came the ice? and the
hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?Ó
—Job 38: 25-29, KJB

—=—

So how does one possibly deÞne God?

!183
How does Creation deÞne its Creator?

Answer: One does not, for no Þctional words created by man may ever account for such an
incomprehensible Wonder of Supreme Being in the Oneness and Law that is Everything in Natural
Existence, as the entirety of Space and Time and Universe. Man’s systems of logical understanding
simply do not apply to such a spiritual Wonder and respect, and his limited “scientiÞcÓ
methodologies of who, what, where, when, and why simply don’t have the power to deÞne and
explain the unexplainable Nature of all that Is in self-Existence. These are but two-dimensional
equations attempting to meet and measure the capacity of man’s mind as applied to the unlimited
and inÞnitely dimensional Oneness of all that is in Being. I don’t know can be the only True answer
to what the totality of God Is, and yet the self-evident and Life-afÞrming Laws of Its Existence are
as clear as night and day, for the Law of God is the Law of our own Nature. The Law of the Creator
is the Law of Creation. What is known to us must be held as sacred and kept untainted, while what
is unknown must not be challenged, for even the unknown is known by us to have self-Existence
and self-evidence. And so we must under Lawful covenant protect our Source of Existence and
eternal Life cycle even in Its elusive, heavenly mystery, quelling the curiosity urge and proÞt
motivation, and limiting “scientiÞcÓ intrusion into that which we are not meant to tamper with. For
to seek a change in the perfection and harmony of that which sustains us is madness, and un-
fortunately this madness is manifested and often licensed and sanctioned by the syndicalist
institutions of the legal state.

We must realize that only the lies and Þctions created by the minds of men need to be proven and
forced to imaginarily exist in their artiÞcial forms and by their terms of art, for they have no life
force or power of their own. Only false gods need be deÞned in false names and ßattering titles. For
without words, legal things cannot exist. God’s Creation needs no proof by man's technologies or
other re-creations or languages to Exist as what is our self-evident Reality. Without man, Reality
would go on timelessly and without a whimper, Existing as if nothing ever happened, for It
respects no such things. As man is and must remain as no thing under that Highest foundation of
Law, we all must celebrate our helplessly combined part and Life in the Oneness of this continuous
Life and death cycle of continuous, never-ending Creation. Most importantly, it is only that which
may be legally or artfully (artiÞcially) deÞned and respected (believed in) that may be controlled.
Thus, in order to hold the power and control of a false god (creator), certain men must persuade
other men to believe in (love) what they say a ÒgodÓ is. It is the very ambiguity and unknown
factor of how the Universe and Nature works in Its wondrous Design that is the beautiful mystery
of God. To accept It in Peace and to Live harmoniously in and under Its Being is the key to spiritual
Life, to Be without want. Only when that humility disappears from man’s mind as his ego
overtakes his humble soulÉ only then can he (the artful thing he pretends to become) rule and be
ruled by other men under Þctional, anti-spirit law.

Let us break down Þnally now this fallacy surrounding the publicly declared ßattering titles we
have now left exposed in the open here, to discover the one unshakable Truth about them that
causes so much confusion. You see, to proclaim a positive (public) non-belief in God would actually
Þrst require some knowledge of God in the negative, for how can one deny what is not somehow
Þrst made known to him? This is bordering on paradox. Non-belief is always in this way a Þction,
whether that non-belief is well-founded and correct or not, and just as most religious beliefs are
positively inßuenced upon us from false scribes and teachers, meaning that they are believed
(loved) without self-evidence. In other words, to proclaim a non-belief is to proclaim a belief in
nothingness. To speciÞcally and more importantly publicly declare one's lack of love (belief) in
anything is to place oneself under some ßattering title, intentionally or not. Non-belief, again, does
not Exist in Nature, for in Nature, nothing Exists because of any belief in the Þrst place. And so to
spend so much time and effort to espouse one's non-belief in anything is perhaps the most rotten
fruit to be eaten from that tree of good and evil concepts of worthless information. And to
ßatteringly title oneself as a non-believer in anything is at best a ridiculous projected self-image
and at worst a destroyer of that which needs no belief in or ÒrightÓ to Exist. And so millions upon
millions may be killed in wars because the mercenary soldiers of one state don’t believe the

!184
ÒsoldiersÓ or ÒterroristsÓ of the other state are men, seeing with corrupted eyes only the ßatteringly
degrading titles and uni-forms assigned to them by their masters.

Blue must kill Red. Red must kill Blue. Why? Because Red and Blue are declared (by magical
words) to be enemies. Why? Because Red kills Blue and Blue kills Red. Why? Because Red and Blue
are at war. Why? Go back to square one, be a good citizen-soldier, and remain happy in this legally
sanctioned circular logic or go to prison. Yes, sir!

This belief in (love of) the false doctrines and legally accepted titles of man's legislatures and
religions is mistakenly called as faith, though the True intention of this word is the following of
speciÞc Law to remain always in good faith and Trust to one another without question. Faith is
another word for trustworthiness, and only when the foundation of Law is agreed upon can any
man be trusted, for his actions will always be predictable and duty-bound. True Faith means
nothing in a legal setting, for the legal law is antichrist, standing against the very intent of follow-
ing christ (the Word of Law) in Jehovah. To put trust in other men with such Pure Faith requires
that this faith be in God, not in men. For the man who follows God's Law (Son) is necessarily and
without question a man of faith (trust), for that is the Law. No contract required, for one's broken
promise to another man is a broken, sacred promise to God. It is a curse upon his soul. And with-
out intention to deceive, words are not even needed. Love and Charity simply cannot be Truly
expressed by words alone.

Sadly, in todays lifestyle, this idealism is passed off as utopian or religious non-sense, even though
in Reality it is the only sensible way for men to Live together, under a Higher Power and Law-
maker than themselves. And this is why kings have done so well in their conquering (purchasing)
of the minds of most men, for they rule not by grace but by the purposeful removal of the True
Grace and Law of God from the minds of men, until all that is left is the despotism of those artful
pirates bearing crowns, Arms, and commercial ßags. We have lost our sacred bond and Law
towards one another, towards treating each other as sacred parts of GodÕs Creation, as GodÕs
Property, and today stand in the debtor’s prison of publicly bonded surety for our transgressions.
Instead of vowing (verb) True faith to one another in God by the Love and Charity of christ, we
stand in the deceitful legal persons of incorporated pledges (noun) of the state. We simply cannot
Truly trust one another, for our faith, our trust, is in money. And we treat each other as just that,
potential sources of labor or money.

In other words, the idolatrous gods of the nations have created a system of society and law based
on non-belief (non-Love) in God and Nature (Source). From organized corporate religion to the
legalistic antichrist law to public education systems to the various arts and entertainments, our
minds have been turned away from what is self-evident towards that which is non-sense. We need
not feel or even express what is right or wrong any longer, for the legal law of man is strict in its
sanctions, and Natural duty has no place there. Wrong is right. Ignorance is strength. ManÕs image
has become his own god.

Remember that a negative cannot be proven, and that the unmarked, unblemished man of God
Exists only by following the negative (Natural) Law and no other, for all other law is merely the
proprietary, positively created terms of art of those other false gods. There is only one Law of
Nature, and all other law is of Þction (anti-Nature). While what is Reality Exists beyond a shadow
of a doubt and without the need of man’s petty religious doctrines, titles, and belief systems, the
power of non-belief (non-love) in Reality is an extremely powerful delusion. Belief in man's religion
is a non-belief of God's Word. Belief in man's law is a non-belief of God's Word. Belief in money
(mammon) is a non-belief of God's Word. One simply cannot have two conßicting beliefs lest one
be not right-minded… and thats the point. Governments only rule over those without right mind.
Thus to control the common multitude, that mass of men must be con-vinced or educated to believe
in (love) nothingness. And we must remember that the entire construct of the legal matrix system is
literal nothingness; merely lies conÞrmed to be truths, Þctions believed to be virtual realities,
religions believed to be Godsends, jurisdictions believed to be part of Nature, by men believed to
have the power of gods. All of these legal patterns of thought require one and only one thing to

!185
subsist, which is an active non-belief in Jehovah; a belief in (love of) Þction over Reality. ManÕs True
Self-awareness must be lost in trickery and illusion through the power of being con-vinced. For we
are convinced (convicted) in felony at birth:

CONVINCE - verb transitive - [Latin, TO VANQUISH.] 1. To persuade or satisfy the mind by

evidence; TO SUBDUE THE OPPOSITION OF THE MIND TO TRUTH, OR TO WHAT IS
ALLEDGED, AND COMPEL IT TO YIELD ITS ASSENT; as, to convince a man of his errors;
or to convince him of the truth. For he mightily convinced the Jews--showing by the
scriptures that Jesus was the Christ. Acts 18:28. 2. TO CONVICT; TO PROVE GUILTY; TO
CONSTRAIN ONE TO ADMIT OR ACKNOWLEDGE HIMSELF TO BE GUILTY. IF YE
HAVE RESPECT TO PERSONS, YE COMMIT SIN, AND ARE CONVINCED OF [BY] THE
LAW AS TRANSGRESSORS. James 2:9. To convince all that are ungodly among them of all
their ungodly deeds. Jude 1:15. 3. To envince; TO PROVE. 4. To overpower; to surmount; to
vanquish. (Webs1828)

VINCIBLE - adjective - [From Latin vinco, to conquer. See Victor. CONQUERABLE; THAT
MAY BE OVERCOME OR SUBDUED. He not vincible in spiritÉ (Webs1828)

VINCTURE - noun - [Latin vinctura.] A BINDING. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

VICTOR - noun - [Latin from vinco, victus, TO CONQUER, or the same root.] 1. One who
conquers in war; a vanquisher; one who defeats an enemy in battle. Victor differs from
conqueror. We apply conqueror to one who subdues countries, kingdoms or nations; as,
Alexander was the conqueror of Asia or India, or of many nations, or of the world. In such
phrases, we cannot substitute victor. But we use victor when we speak of ONE WHO
OVERCOMES A PARTICULAR ENEMY, or in a particular battle; as, Cesar was victor at
Pharsalia. The duke of Wellington was victor at Waterloo. Victor then is not followed by the
possessive case; for we do not say, Alexander was the victor of Darius, though we say, he was
victor at Arbela. 2. One who vanquishes another in private combat or contest; as a victor in
the Olympic games. 3. One who wins, OR GAINS THE ADVANTAGE. In love, the victors
from the vanquish'd ßy; They ßy that wound, and they pursue that die. 4. MASTER; LORD.
These, victor of his health, his fortune, friends. [Not usual nor legitimate.] (Webs1828)

—=—

Remember, another word for conquer is purchase. What better way to conquer man than through
mammon? We are all purchased by the beneÞts and other valued Þctions offered by governments
that cause us to voluntarily incorporate with their artiÞce. We are de-feated, for our feet are swept
up into Þction, and we are no longer grounded in the Reality of GodÕs Nature and Its Law. We are
conned into becoming and remaining vincible.

Once we are con-vinced to believe that we are strawmen, as the legal persons (property) of the state
instead of men (Creation and property) of God, we have at this point been vanquished from our
Natural Realm, Freedom, recognized ÒNatural, God-given Rights,Ó and Will. The whole of the Law
is broken by breaking just this one, perhaps most important part of the Laws of Nature, that of
respecting not any manÕs person (Þction). To the average man, this sin (syn) would seem way less
of a crime than something like murder. And yet a participation and respect of person-hood is the
gateway to breaking all other Law, for Þction (an actor) is not bound to NatureÕs Authority or Law.
All the gods of the nations exist only because of the persons (property) they trick and cause men to
act in and respect.

And so let us be clearÉ The man who follows the example of christ in Law is invincible. But no
single part of GodÕs Law of Nature may be broken without the whole being broken. God grants no
licensure. Nature allows for no Þction. And lies can Þnd no quarter. But let us also be clear that the
invincibility spoken of here refers not to the brutal actions of other men convinced of their arbitrary
ÒrightÓ to harm you or kill you. True, Natural Freedom is always steeped in such a risk that the

!186
lawless may vanquish the Lawful. The invincibility spoken of here is from words, from Þctions,
from all the causalities and tricks of the devils and agents of the artiÞce. For it is only the Pure
knowledge of what is Truth (God) that may defeat artiÞcial information (technology). The Bible
scriptures are very clear that christ is no paciÞst. It is up to you to protect, with your very Life if
necessary, your own Freedom under God and that of your family and fellow travelers. For he who
seeks to harm or injure the private, innocent man has no legal protections to call upon to back his
attempts. His gods are powerless against the man whose God is of Nature. But I stress again that
wanton violence and murder cannot be halted with mere knowledge. The remnant of like-minded
people must Þnd each other so as to protect each other while Living in and under the Highest Law.

—=—

“The Roots of Violence: Wealth without work, Pleasure without

conscience, Knowledge without character, COMMERCE WITHOUT
MORALITY, Science without humanity, WORSHIP WITHOUT
SACRIFICE, POLITICS WITHOUT PRINCIPLES.”
—Mahatma Gandhi

—=—

And now we may certainly see how the victor is privileged with writing its own history. It is not
that history repeats, it is that history is the property of those who seek to perpetuate their own
repetitious cycles of empire and control of the minds of men (govern-ment). Unbeknownst to the
goyim of the nations, the political (artiÞcial) history of tomorrow is already written today.

—=—

“He who controls the present, controls the past. HE WHO CONTROLS
THE PAST, CONTROLS THE FUTURE.”
—George Orwell

—=—

“The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is
done is that which shall be done: AND THERE IS NO NEW THING
UNDER THE SUN.”
—Ecclesiastes 1:9, KJB

—=—

The moral of the story: do not let the history of today’s false gods dictate your future, for history is
always a lie told to justify the reign of the false gods of the future. There is nothing new under
God’s Design, in Nature, only in man’s re-designed inventions. God has no history, no past and no
future, for all Creation is a timeless Oneness of permanent Being. The scriptures are not history, but
timeless, undeniable prophesies. They are Life lessons, as Living parables designed to prevent
future sin and evil (artiÞcial) dis-positions and laws, not to justify them. They heal the wayward
mind, body, and soul even when already lost to manÕs Þctions and arts. They are like a spiritualistic
preventative medicine, whereas man’s history only seeks to devolve our essence and existence into
to an event on one point of its imaginary timeline, destroying man’s connection to God’s Eternity
(the Ever).

!187
Only one Law may Exist and be followed at any one moment. Two things or laws that conßict
cannot both be respected at the same time. Christ (timelessness) and antichrist (time) cannot subsist
together, as matter and anti-matter are forbidden to be mingled. The spiritual, moral Law is not
based on history, only the legal law is. And so non-belief in Jehovah (True Existence, Its Design, and
Its Law) is the essence and goal of creating public-mindedness, which creates a belief in un-
believable, non-self-Existent things. And so, because the positive legal law is more respected than
the negative Natural Law by the multitude, because men have been robbed of their comprehension
and Highest Duty of that Foundational, Moral, spiritual Law, everything we do legally (artiÞcially)
in this society is done in a spiritually dead, civil life (false persona), totally against the spiritual
teachings of scripture. EVERYTHING!

To wonder at and accept the unknown qualities and Laws of Existence, of the Universe, is perhaps
the Truest Faith. It is to Love and protect all that Exists, even beyond our perfectly limited senses,
and as such is the key to spirituality and inner Peace. For the unknown is meant to remain un-
known, and the search for the Source of the unknown is driving us mad. It’s called as and pre-
tended to be a “science.” But in fact, it is a careless disregard for the limitations of the perfect
Design over us, of that which keeps us Pure, as the Laws of Nature. If man were meant to ßy he
would spur wings. And if he were meant to Live on another planet he would be born there. To put
it another way, until man has learned his place in his own Nature here upon his intended garden of
Eden, then under no circumstances should he seek out new places to despoil the Nature of with his
foolish and arrogant ways. The Law of Nature is indeed the walls of a spiritual prison, a barrier of
protection from corruption, a Kingdom for the preservation of perfection. This word prison
(garden) is not good nor evil, just a word to describe intent and purpose for the Law. All roads
away from Nature lead to hell, for hell Exists only in lies and self-deceit. For once he perfects his
Natural Life here on God’s green Earth, he would or should have no need or reason to ever leave.
Instead, we make ourselves an endangered species in every way imaginable, though our only
predator or danger is from ourselves.

—=—

“THE LIFE OF GOD — THE LIFE WHICH THE MIND APPREHENDS

AND ENJOYS AS IT RISES TO THE ABSOLUTE UNITY OF ALL
THINGS — may be described as a play of love with itself; but this idea
sinks to an edifying truism, or even to a platitude, when it does not
embrace in it the earnestness, the pain, the patience, and labor,
INVOLVED IN THE NEGATIVE ASPECT OF THINGS.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, from ‘The Phenomenology of Spirit’ (1807)

—=—

A perfection of spiritual Life under negative Law without need of Þctional surnames and titles is
the foundational scriptural lesson. But the act of positively (publicly) stating one's non-belief in
anything is to create a legal (anti-Nature/unreal) fact out of nothingness. This is by nature the
creation and worship of Þction. It is chaos. It is a purposeless opposition to what is Real (negative).
And so the reader should bear in mind that belief as well as non-belief in artiÞcial things are
equally dangerous. Acknowledgement of any legal fact in man's law, either as an existing or non-
existing thing, is the entire basis of that legal Þction. Like the word truth, legal facts are always lies
built on words. For no Truth, no Reality, and thus no True Fact can Exist in that legal realm of pure
falsehoods. Lies must be adjudicated as legal facts for such Þctions to have power and artiÞcial life,
just as the mirror image cannot exist without our Source for its reßection, masterfully fooling our
perceptions of our True, actual Selves. In other words, the lesson is quite simple here. The author is
simply trying to tell you as christ did to keep your damned opinions to yourself. There is never any
reason to publicly declare, register, or inform government or its public agents of a private thought.

!188
For it is the public declaration of ßattering title itself, written or unwritten, that creates the
authority of legal Þction. That which subsists in the mind is negative, what is brought out in the
public as terms of art is positive. This is the nature of the public law. A follower of christ would no
more call himself a ÒChristianÓ of any religion than a Lawful man would call himself a criminal.
And he who calls himself publicly an ÒatheistÓ or ÒanarchistÓ is, just as the ÒChristian,Ó doing so
only for public, positive, vain show. A man need no such publicly declared ßattery if his actions
prove his intent.

The point is that Jesus christ never claimed any forced, publicly declared title and instead rejected
them all, and neither should any man that follows the Law (Son) of God. To be clear, over 200
titles/names were in fact used to describe christ, but none of them were publicly registered words
of Caesar. None of those names were surnames. Christ was never called Bob Smith of other legal
name. And this is extremely important, for these names stood in ambiguity, not as public, legal
accusations. The Lamb of God is simply not a certiÞed legal name. It is a private contemplation of
the untainted Being of christ expressed ambiguously and in negative (good willed, faithful) intent
under God. In other words, christ could not be called or forcibly summoned by such non-legal
names and titles by the gods of Þction, for they were not expressed by him as proprietary terms of
those gods of the nations. He could not be forced, for instance, to answer to or bear the false title of
Òking of the Jews.Ó He never called himself by these words, never consented to their power, and so
never was put into bond and surety for that ßattering title.

—=—

“Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered,
THOU SAYEST that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this
cause came I into the world, THAT I SHOULD BEAR WITNESS UNTO
THE TRUTH. Every one that is OF THE TRUTH heareth my voice.”
—John 18:37, KJB

—=—

“Then said the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of
the Jews; BUT THAT HE SAID, I AM King of the Jews.”
—John 19:21, KJB

—=—

Though Jesus never states that I AM any thing at all, instructing us to be no-thing at all times, his
violent delivery to the Jews required the legal lie, the false, ßattering title assigned to him, and that
of his own acquiescence (non-denial) to it. And so the chief priest simply lied for the record, as they
all do, for their entire system of law and words is the lie. It is not enough merely to accuse one of
such a title, the accusation must be admitted by the patient of such a dis-ease as an admission of
guilt. Christ could only be killed if he took that false, ßattering title, and such a title was publicly
declared. Thus the statement must read as an afÞrmative I Am king and not merely the accusative he
is the king.

It should be noted here that in the nation, in public society, all of the laws effecting legal, public
persons (property of the nation) are created and ratiÞed strictly by our collective silence. Mean-
while, we play a game of make-believe that those laws are actually created by us, through our so-
called Òrepresentatives,Ó as if they are us, and even though weÕve never even met. Notice here the
striking absence of the I Am, of any individual voice or choice.

!189
Likewise, no man in his right mind would state so arrogantly that I Am an anarchist, atheist, or
christian, even when labeled as such by others, for those making the accusation can only harm and
kill the surety for bearing that ßattering title, but never just the untainted, unblemished man with-
out such a public title. The legal system and its agents can only harm legal things (property of its
own), which is why man is to never proclaim his True Self to be as any thing. True Life is never a
legal thing. With no title, no persecution of that title is to be suffered by its bearer. For as the Jews
so desperately stated while trying to convict christ:

—=—

“Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and JUDGE HIM
ACCORDING TO YOUR LAW. The Jews therefore said unto him, IT IS
NOT LAWFUL FOR US TO PUT ANY MAN TO DEATH…”
—John 18:31, KJB

—=—

By their trickery and deceit, and only through this word-magic could they justify killing the man,
for they would be pretending to kill the title (persona) instead of the man. Man cannot be harmed
as the foundation of and under the Law, only the persona and title he is assigned or that he stands
for in bond and surety (in sin). This is one of the most repeated lessons in the allegory of the Bible,
and speciÞcally in the story of Jesus christ, the example we should all follow. As publicly birthed
and registered, Þctional citizen-ships of the nations (districts of Caesar), our stories were long ago
separated from the scriptural Law, our footprints nowhere to be found next to that unblemished
path of christ. And until we admit to this defeat of our souls and spirits, we may never Þnd Peace.

Squirrels do not identify with that name, nor do the birds and the bees claim to be those terms of
art we call them. Nature needs no words to be self-Existent, and neither do you. Titles are always
used for deceitful purposes, even when that deceit is perceived to be an innocent lie (paradox). But
no man may carry a title, only his false persona, which is birthed in felony already. Titles are always
lies, and there are no Truly innocent lies. More on this later…

So have we answered the question? Do we now know what the word “god” means? Therefore, do
we now know and stand in foundation of what the only True God Is?

This author would not dare in this honest work of self-evident Truth to tread on such an endeavor
as to attempt to describe the appearance of some imagined, personiÞcation, anthropomorphism, or
other form of what that Highest substance of God Is, and so leaves that futility to the utter arrogance
of priests, kings, and popes in their organized deceit and desire to be as lesser replacement gods. It
is only when man arrogantly attempts to deÞne what God Is in our limited capacity of language
understanding and in the futility of the arts and sciences that his very own tyranny may persist, for
man will always only point to himself in the absence of an anthropomorphized personiÞcation and
image of God. The creator of the image is the creator of the god. When we attempt to place words
or images (idols) in explanation of what God Is, we then turn God into only a positive image of the
mind, a mere baseless form unconnected to Nature, as a humanistic replacement created from a
jumble of words and paint strung together to form a descriptive non-Reality, a personiÞcation, an
anthropomorphized Þction. In this way, man no longer respects the True, mostly unknown sub-
stance of GodÕs Nature (Creation), and begins either acting in or respecting GodÕs mis-taken form
over Its incomprehensible but obvious Reality (Substance of Nature), and most often this manifests
as a human form; a graven image; a false representation; an idol; a vanity; a nation; a king; a pope.

Ultimately, it was only when man claimed god-ship (priesthood and empire) that man lost touch
with God’s True Nature and Wonder of Being so many centuries ago. He began worshiping an
empty form without contemplation of Substance, as a name without referential to its Source. He fell

!190
in love with a simulacrum: a copy without Origin, an appearance or reßection without Source, and
began hiding away in the false security of an artiÞcial womb (matrix). And so the institutions of the
gods; those temples, synagogues, monuments, churches, and masonic government domes of old
and new form were stretched over GodÕs Nature to keep men from contemplating the Reality and
power of the Nature of GodÕs Creation. For Creation is Nature, and GodÕs recognizable Nature and
substance is Creation.

The designer is only evidenced by the nature of its design; the creator by its creation. This rule
certainly applies not only to the Reality of all Nature, but to all things secular as well as religious
(ecclesiastical) as to the inventions of men. Man creates ideas and patents them as their legal,
personal creator, thus controlling the potential future use, proÞts, and applications of those
uniquely worded and re-presented ideas, writings, images, and the incorporations and
manufacturing of them. Does this make man as a god over his own secondary creation; over a
realm of legal Þction so vast that even NatureÕs Design Itself is hidden under manÕs artiÞce? The
answer to that question will certainly become clear as we proceed through this work.

No matter how many artiÞcial gods exist in magisterial idolatry over their own artiÞcial, legal
creations and jurisdictions, it must be remembered and cherished as the foundation of all things
that it is GodÕs Creation of Nature that is the only Design that never needs positive proof of owner-
ship of Its actual (negative) Existence; no formalities such as copyrights or patents and no names or
titles. Nature (Reality), including any man Living only in his True Nature, never need prove Its
Own Existence, for It Exists despite manÕs opinions or considerations of It. One simply can never
prove a negative, unless one declares it to be a positive. Man only Exists in Reality as part of GodÕs
Nature (Creation). It is only when man assumes Þctional descriptions of words, names, titles, and
numerical marks in a Þctional, make-believe personhood that he falls from such a Natural State of
Grace. Only artiÞcial things need proof of their artful existence.

A painting certainly Exists, but is not part of the Origin of Existence. The painting is only manÕs
design, and is only a re-creation of Reality, utilizing parts of Nature in its formula. Like the
reßection in the mirror, it is not of Source. From the frame to the canvas to the chemical paints used
in its recreation, the painting as a secondary creation of man cannot be said to be a Creation of God,
only a re-presentation in image and empty form of what is GodÕs Nature and Perfect Design. All of
manÕs creations are thus imperfect uses of GodÕs Perfection of Nature. Man may Live in Creation
but may only ever be the cause (secondary source) of re-creation.

This is a fundamental concept of all law, the principles of which always differentiate between what
is of God (Source) and what is of man (technology/art/resource). As such, these mostly Latin and
often scripturally sourced Òmaxims of lawÓ will be portrayed throughout this work. For only by
intimately understanding the principles (maxims) of law can one circumnavigate through that
bulwark of legal jargon.

BAILIWICK - noun - [bailli, an ofÞcer, see bailiff.] The precincts in which a bailiff has
jurisdiction; THE LIMITS OF A BAILIFF'S AUTHORITY; as a hundred, a liberty, a forest,
over which a bailiff is appointed. In the liberties and franchises of lords, THE BAILIFF
HAS EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION. (Webs1828)

BAILIE - In the Scotch law. (1) A MAGISTRATE having inferior criminal and civil
jurisdiction, similar to that of an alderman, (2) an ofÞcer appointed TO CONFER
INFEOFFMENT, A BAILIFF, A SERVER OF WRITS. (Black4)

BAILIFF - One to whom some authority, care, GUARDIANSHIP, OR JURISDICTION IS

DELIVERED, committed, or intrusted; ONE WHO IS DEPUTED OR APPOINTED TO
TAKE CHARGE OF ANOTHER'S AFFAIRS; AN OVERSEER OR SUPERINTENDENT; A
KEEPER, protector, or GUARDIAN; a steward. A SHERIFF'S OFFICER OR DEPUTY. A
court attendant, sometimes called a tipstaff. A magistrate, who formerly administered justice
in the parliaments or courts of France, answering to the English sheriffs as mentioned by

!191
 Bracton. A PERSON acting in a MINISTERIAL capacity who has BY DELIVERY the custody
and administration of lands or goods FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE OWNER OR BAILOR,
and is liable to render an account thereof. (Black4)

BAILOR - The party who bails or delivers goods to another, in the contract of bailment.
(Black4)

BAIL - noun - The surety or sureties who procure the RELEASE OF A PERSON under arrest,
BY BECOMING RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS APPEARANCE AT THE TIME AND PLACE
DESIGNATED. Those persons who become sureties for the appearance of the defendant in
court. (Black4)

BAIL - verb transitive - 1. To set free, DELIVER, or liberate from arrest and imprisonment,
UPON SECURITY GIVEN THAT THE PERSON BAILED SHALL APPEAR AND ANSWER
IN COURT. The word is applied to the magistrate, or the SURETY. THE MAGISTRATE
BAILS A MAN, WHEN HE LIBERATES HIM FROM ARREST OR IMPRISONMENT,
UPON BOND GIVEN WITH SURETIES. THE SURETY BAILS A PERSON, WHEN HE
PROCURES HIS RELEASE FROM ARREST, BY GIVING BOND FOR HIS APPEARANCE.
2. To deliver goods in trust, UPON A CONTRACT, expressed or implied, that the trust shall
be faithfully executed on the part of the bailee or person entrusted; as, to bail cloth to a tailor
to be made into a garment, or to bail goods to a carrier. 3. TO FREE FROM WATER, as to bail
a boat. This word is improperly written bale. The word is probably the same as bail in law, to
free, or liberate, and signiÞes to throw out water, as with a bucket or shovel. - noun - The
PERSON or persons who procure the release of a prisoner from custody, BY BECOMING
SURETY FOR HIS APPEARANCE IN COURT. The bail must be real substantial bondsmen.
B and B were bail to the arrest in a suit at law. Bail is not used with a plural termination. 2. The
security given for the release of a prisoner from custody; as, the man is out upon bail.
Excessive bail ought not to be required. Bail is common or special. COMMON BAIL ARE
IMAGINARY PERSONS, who are PLEDGES for the plaintiff's prosecution; as John Doe and
Richard Roe. SPECIAL BAIL MUST BE MEN OF REAL SUBSTANCE, sufÞcient to pay their
bond or recognizance. To perfect or justify bail is TO PROVE BY THE OATH OF THE
PERSON THAT HE IS WORTH THE SUM FOR WHICH HE IS SURETY BEYOND HIS
DEBTS. To admit to bail is to release upon security given by bondsmen. 3. The handle of a
kettle or other vessel. 4. In England, a certain limit within a forest. (Webs1828)

—=—

To be clear, the god (judge/magistrate) bails (sets free) the man back into his corporate franchise
(controlled liberty) of citizen-ship (called legally as “freedom,” where free legally means to be
bound in “franchise”), while the man acting as surety bails out the person (citizen-ship) as the
vessel he operates commercially under that legal franchise. To be in national citizen-ship is to be in
a permanent state of surety for some person (property) of government and thus to be a bail, which
is the deÞnition of a Strawman. Free-dom is a commercial franchise under the DOMinion of the
magistrates (gods). To have legal freedom, therefore, in legalese, means to be a slave in bondage
through surety to a person (status). For legal freedom is that which is opposed to Natural Freedom.
It’s all in the words, the terms of art. Freedom is slavery, just as Orwell penned. But again we have
the choice to be a slave of God, of the Law of Nature, or a slave of other men under legal, voluntary
conscription. And as we will see, the act of de-livery of the ÒchildÓ at birth is in-deed the act of a
bailment, of assigning the child to be a ward under the guardianship of the state, with a permanent
bail set in persona, and with a permanent surety in agency to appear in court whenever the person
(name) is summoned by the magistrates (gods).

Confused? You should be. For this is the legal system, and con-fusion is the effect of which that
word-magic is designed to invoke, while the masterÕs methods and design are never revealed in
their trickery. When the conman gets into your mind, his trickery is fused with your perception of
Reality. And thereÕs nothing intuitive about the legal con. That which is legal is always a design

!192
birthed in con-fusion and built upon divisive word-magic. It is the Þction of licensed lawlessness
and purposeful delusion. But I digress…

Back to God’s Word and those who seek to replace It with art. Whatever law is followed by men is
the law of the god that created it. GodÕs Word is personiÞed into the story of christ (John 1:1). In
other words, one either follows the example of christ's actions written as the spiritual (unwritten)
Law or one becomes a slave of the legalistic (written) law of men. ItÕs that simple.

—=—

“But BE YE DOERS OF THE WORD, AND NOT HEARERS ONLY,

DECEIVING YOUR OWN SELVES… For he beholdeth himself, and
goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth
therein, HE BEING NOT A FORGETFUL HEARER, BUT A DOER OF
THE WORK, this man shall be blessed in his deed. If any man among
you seem to be religious, AND BRIDLETH NOT HIS TONGUE, but
deceiveth his own heart, THIS MAN'S RELIGION IS VAIN. PURE
RELIGION AND UNDEFILED BEFORE GOD AND THE FATHER IS
THIS, To visit the fatherless and widows in their afßiction, AND TO
KEEP HIMSELF UNSPOTTED FROM THE WORLD.”
—James 1:22, 25-27, KJB

—=—

Spot (to be spotted by the world) is another word for mark, name, and number, used in this scripture
with the metaphorical meaning of being physically and morally unblemished and thus free from
censure, of being irreproachable, being free from vice, and being unsullied. Of course these
descriptive elements that we are to spiritually avoid are the very combined positive, legal id-entity,
standing as the requirements of what a citizen-ship is, of social security, of licenses, of legalism, and
of identiÞcation through the surname (last name) admixed with the Þrst (christian) name.

The spots of the world on manÕs soul are presented in StrongÕs Concordance and lexicons as:

WORLD - Strong's G2889 - kosmos (κόσ&ος):

1. An apt and harmonious arrangement or CONSTITUTION, ORDER, GOVERNMENT

2. Ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, 'the heavenly
hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3

3. The world, the universe

4. The circle of the earth, the earth

5. The INHABITANTS of the earth, MEN, THE HUMAN FAMILY

6. THE UNGODLY MULTITUDE; THE WHOLE MASS OF MEN ALIENATED FROM

GOD, AND THEREFORE HOSTILE TO THE CAUSE OF CHRIST

!193
 7. WORLD AFFAIRS, the aggregate of things earthly

1 THE WHOLE CIRCLE OF EARTHLY GOODS, ENDOWMENTS, RICHES,

ADVANTAGES, PLEASURES, etc., which although hollow and frail and ßeeting,
STIR DESIRE, seduce from God and ARE OBSTACLES TO THE CAUSE OF
CHRIST

8. Any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort (i.e. artiÞcial persons, as
aggregate corporations)

1 The Gentiles (goyim) as contrasted to the Jews (Romans 11:12, etc.)

—=—

To sit in contemplation of this is to realize that, by the very act of voluntary citizen-ship to any
nation, we are breaking completely with God’s Law. By having member-ship in persona to any
corporation (artiÞcial person) called as a ÒreligionÓ or ÒchurchÓ is to break with GodÕs Law. And by
having possessions, which can only be proved positively as ÒpropertyÓ through legal means and in
contractual relation-ship with government in legal persona (as citizen-ships), we are induced to fall
away from God and enter into the Þction of the legal world. To say we are spotted by worldly things
in this age is the understatement of all time. No man may own a part of God, of Nature. Only a
legal persona (status) created by man’s designs in legalism may make such a false, imaginary claim
on paper (in legal Þction) over the names (nouns) of Real things. The only wealth of the world is
Nature Itself, Reality, and all else can only be the recreation of man. But the spirit resides only in the
Source, and thus the spirituality of man may only manifest through the Source of his own Nature
as part of Creation. The church and state are worldly things. They are dead creations of man. They
are only ever re-creation, for man originates no thing in Nature, not even the line of his own blood
that he helplessly passes down to the next generation in a ßeeting moment of sexual pleasure,
hope, and ecstasy. These institutions are not of Nature, not of God, not of the spirit, and not of
Source. This is the Word of God.

This Supremacy of God when respected is self-evident, for this is the Reality or Natural State of all
things which we call as Creation. One need not adopt a literal translation for this word, lest it lead
to questions that have no answers and only appease the ego. The word Creation is just a word used
to describe Nature in Its untainted substance and ßow absent from the imaginations and designs of
man’s mind. To contemplate further what Is Creation is a fools errand. Undisturbed and not trißed
with, that which is here in Existence and what was before us is the Permanence of Reality we call as
GodÕs Creation and Nature, and all else must be a sacriÞce of that Reality, turning the substance of
God into new forms of artiÞciality (as technology) used against NatureÕs Perfection of Design by
men. Creation was not some random event long ago, it is the continuous formation of all Life and
substance in Nature (Reality) that will continue on long after our own death and certainly without
our permission. Ultimately, when speaking of the best interests of man, his protection of that
Original Design as the perfection of Creation is the highest self-interest, and thus must be the
Highest Law, for man is merely a totally dependent part of this permanent and ongoing Creation.
Thus, since a legal patenter of ideas and mechanical or biological designs may only alter God’s
Reality into some new (novel) form of the True substance of Nature, inevitably and often without
conscious thought the goal of that scientiÞc design is to alter the Ultimate Design of NatureÕs ebb
and ßow, and to alter or interrupt the harmony of Life Itself. And so despite the fact that manÕs
inventions are only re-creations of the Permanent Domain and ambiguous ÒPropertyÓ of GodÕs
Creation, man arrogantly describes them in law as his own legally ÒpatentedÓ creation without
respect of all Source. Man does this despite the fact that even his fantastically intricate design and
circuitry covered in cholesterol, for which he calls his own brain, is only part of GodÕs Design of
Creation. Like the so-called American settlers pretended through the words of legal artiÞce to
ÒpurchaseÓ but really only stole the lands of the aboriginals, citizen-ships pretend to steal Nature
from God by redesigning it into more humanistic and linguistic forms and then registering it as if it
were suddenly outside of GodÕs Design of Creation.

!194
The savvy reader may already have concluded that these are not at all “religious” concepts, merely
an ancient battle between the Reality of All Things (God) and the adversarial Þctions (satanism)
created by man. If the reader chooses to call this religion, so be it, for that word is also a creation of
man. If the reader chooses to call this science, so be it, for that word as all words are merely the
creation of man. But both readers must come together and realize that these are just words, played
out as the big lie and represented as either the science of religion or the religion of science. But the
self-evident Reality of all Existence does not change no matter what we decide to call or style It, for
it is not our Creation. And for this work, we are calling It (the Reality of Nature) as the capitalized
word “God.”

If the reader cannot get past this Word due to his religious or non-religious ideals, then he in that
infantile state of being is not ready for these words, for he is not ready to face Reality head on. And
so continuing with this work will be a futile effort. This is only setting the foundation of our use of
such words herein. Love and hatred of this word will only serve as a self-deceit and spiritual
barrier to True knowledge. Words cannot control you unless you allow them to, just as it is with
Law.

The word religion must also be understood before such a claim can be made, of course, and it will.
Likewise, the word science must be dissected and cross-referenced so as to discover its true intent
and purpose as compared to the abusive title and licensed (lawless) application it has received by
man’s institutional, corporate designs adversarial to its spiritual Reason. In the end, it is the
purposefully decisive division of these two concepts, of religion and science, that has created all
problems, when in Reality science is just the study of God’s Nature, and the True spirit of religion
(moral Law) is only to be a strong barrier to the destructive inßuence of science gone mad. To
separate these two concepts, spirituality and law (science), is the most dangerous division
imaginable.

Ironically, it appears that the established, institutionalized religions and corporate ventures of
manÕs artiÞcial world have nothing to do with comprehending and thus under-standing the True
Nature of God (Existence) or that of man’s place within It. Instead, man’s designs that we call in
false name only as “religion,” “science,” and legal “law” take us away from this symbiosis between
man and his Source of Life in Nature. For in our legalistic societies the Creation knows and respects
not his Creator, nor Its Intent of Design, nor Its Will, nor Its Reason. And so man’s sciences are as a
severely out-of-tune piano, a corruption of the very harmonic essence they should respect, and
acting (with license to kill) completely inharmoniously with that Permanence of Nature’s Design
and Frequency. The comprehension of such a wondrous perfection as God’s Creation has been
replaced only with the tainted words and empty terms of linguistic arts presented by lawyers,
priests, judges, and politicians. In this ÒscientiÞc dictatorshipÓ (technocracy), its members often
claim to act as gods (magistrates) of their own artiÞcially created realm, while permitting and
licensing themselves (as artiÞcial persons/corporations) to act completely in anarchy against the
Higher Law. They represent a trifecta of institutionalized, syndicalist protectionism regarding their
own false re-creationism, one propping the other up within an artiÞcial, protective system while
garnering an illusionary re-presentation of the authority of God. But let us not pretend that God
Itself would allow man free rein over that Creation of Its Perfection of Design without laying out Its
Law; as if God Itself issues license to man so that he may destroy God’s Own Perfect Creation with
legalistic, amoral impunity. This is ridiculous. Imagine Mother Nature calmly smiling in approval
as She’s being molested, raped, genetically altered, and polluted by her own parasitic creation. That
doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, now does it? And yet this is what the church teaches to man: to
follow the legal (anti-God) law of the land, which is the law of men as magistrates (gods) in place of
the Word of God, so that we may have dominion but no responsibility in guardianship over the
world and to exploit it and even ourselves in our own image.

So lost are we from our relation to God’s Nature as our Source of Being and Life that we fear It
instead of embracing It as the purity of Love It subsists in. It is considered instead as something
that grows outside of our fences and corporate, municipal borders, boundaries, and city limits,
most often considered only as an intruding force upon our artiÞcial concrete and steel jungles,

!195
replete with scattered and organized topiaries reminding us of our perceived but always false
victory over God’s Perfectly Randomized Design of Nature. Dystopia… And so the legal opinion of
corrupt men is that Nature is that which must be controlled and killed to make way for man’s
desecration of all that Is and always has been, which we call Jehovah (God) as “The Existing One,”
the Oneness of all Existence. In other words, the progress of man’s creation requires the symbolic
killing of God, though this is ultimately a fools errand of impossibility. Man’s will and thus his
artiÞce often appears to be winning the battle between the Creation and Its Creator, man against
Nature, but this too is merely the illusionary tactics of that organized lie administered by those
same lawyers, priests, and politicians that protect their own designs of men over that of God’s
Natural Design of Creation. In the end, of course, Nature will always Reign Supreme. God (self-
Existence) is indefatigable, never wearying but by the temporary afßictions of man against it that
will eventually be healed in Its timelessness. And so it is that NatureÕs Laws are always Supreme.
The artiÞcial must always bow to the Supremacy of its proclaimed reason for legal existence. Satan
(all that is adversarial to the Natural Design and Law) may never defeat GodÕs Nature, only pre-
tend to do so, using the artful things of the world and of the ßesh created to deceive and lead man
away from his own Nature. And that which is satan’s tool is only ever words, which in their most
deadly form manifest as that of a legal contract, where the contract cause man to act against his
own best interests under a false law. Satanic things can never be Naturally occurring things, for
they must be forced upon and over Natural things and be respected by men that they might exist in
their artiÞcial form. Only dis-ease and dis-harmony comes therefrom.

Registered legal property is the name of the legal game; a Þctional proof of existence where there is
actually none (no-thing-ness). Proof does not create or sustain Life, for the actual Life would
necessarily need to Exist in Nature before it could be proven to exist also in Þction. First and last.
Likewise, land (soil) is always in Existence as a Reality before any legal title may ever represent it
as legal ÒlandÓ and Òproperty.Ó GodÕs Creation is all that in Reality Exists. Legalism is only ever
secondary to that Source. In this light, Life itself (Creation) needs not the proof of manÕs vain
contemplations, names, titles, or other legal considerations to Exist as and in Pure Reality. Man is
only a visitor in God’s Unending, Perfect, Permanently Existing Topiary (utopia). And this spiritual
knowledge is the key to manÕs Natural Freedom. Only designs against GodÕs Nature of Creation
need legal (artiÞcial) evidence to prove their legal (artful) existence and false authority under men
acting as false gods or as their subjects. No man can own in Reality the Design of God, which we
label as things born in Nature or as Acts of God, simply because no man can create the Origin of
Nature and of Life. No man is God. But that does not prevent men from pretending to act in the
ofÞce of god and under the name of and in the stead of ÒGod.Ó Thus we Þnd the most important
maxim of man’s law, which states that: the creator controls. And so man is god over whatever he
creates, but never over the Origin of the Creation of man by God. This is perhaps the most import-
ant aspect of all Law, for a man can only control another man (as a Creation of God) if that man
(Creature) can be tricked into operating not under the actual Creator of his Existence in Nature and
Its Law in Reality, but instead under the Þctional, legal creation (persona) of another man. We call
this as a strawman.

God (self-evidence) cannot be proven. God (Reality) can only be Lived in despite any artful
proof. To surrender oneself to God is to rid oneself of all artiÞce and positive concepts. Do not allow
yourself to perceive this work “positive” as “good,” for that is merely fruit of the tree. Instead
under-stand that what is positive in law is a creation only of man, and thus is not of God's Nature.
To accept only what is Real is to Exist only in the negative (self-existent) Realm and Law. Once man
has something he feels the need to positively prove to other men, he is no longer Living under God.
He is no longer Existing in Nature. For nothing self-Existing in Nature needs proven. And so every
time man shows identiÞcation to prove his false appearance and legal existence in some Þctional id-
entity though a legal form (false persona) to any magistrate (god) or agent of government, this is an
acknowledgement and legal acceptation and consent of the legitimacy of that Þction and the legal
law that binds its persona (status). This existence lies as a positive proof that his chosen god is the
undeniably the legal state.

I was surprised to Þnd that the maximÕs of law agreed on this point.

!196
 —=—

“Plain truths need not be proved.”

—Perspicua vera non sunt probanda. Co. Litt. 16. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

A man never need prove he is a man. This is a plain Truth, plainly visible, and undeniable. He only
ever need prove that which is not of God’s Creation, that which is opposed to his own Nature.
Names, titles, insurance numbers, and other legal creations of man’s designs and imaginations
must be proven, for they are not self-evident as part of Reality, as a part of the Oneness of God.
Only property, not what is ambiguous, need be proven.

Please understand that if you go to court because your legal person was summoned thereto, the
last thing you would say to that judge is that I am a man and not a person. Only a fool would insult
the judges intelligence of what is so plainly self-evident and self-existent, and that is standing right
in front of his eyes. The judge is looking for one of two legal entities, the person or the agent
attorney for that person. And so you will either appear in person due to ignorance of the law and
your place in it or you will present yourself as agent (attorney) for that legal person to render
whatever account needs discharging. But you must never show yourself to be such a fool as to
insist that you are a man. For with this one foolish action you have shown a complete illiteracy of
the legal system and of the Higher Law. You have proven right away that you are an infantile,
vulgar natural that is non compos mentis (not of right mind). No man was called or summoned to
appear, because the court has no power to call upon God’s Creation. It can only call upon its own
property and those in surety to it, its own Þctions of law.

The Existence of what is Real requires no proof. Only the words that de-scribe and re-deÞne actual
Existence into a Þctional form need such an afÞrmative, positively declared and enforced artiÞce.
And this is the key to everything that we must learn from this point forward. For to Live spiritually
in and under God (in Nature, by christ) as the only authority is to Live outside of all legal artiÞce
and harmful designs (creations) of men. Yet to merely, vulgarly “believe” in God as Creator without
Living in the Love of God’s Creation and by that Supreme Law of Nature is the essence of a fool.
Fools attend church and pre-tend to be christ-like in their minds and through unearned ßattering
titles, vainly participating in pointless ceremonies of pomp and circumstance and false show, while
their minds, bodies, and souls languish in want of communion with their Source and beauty of
Life.

Belief in God is in Reality a declaration of moral intent under the Natural Law of God, and the
actions a man takes thereby prove that belief (Love), not his words alone. Belief in this respect of
God as self-evident is the Purest state of Being, of Pure Love and Charity.

The Bible is clear as to what it is to Live under God’s Law and Nature, this being the epitome of
what some call the christ consciousness:

—=—

“LIE NOT ONE TO ANOTHER, seeing that ye have put off the old man
with his deeds; AND HAVE PUT ON THE NEW MAN, WHICH IS
RENEWED IN KNOWLEDGE AFTER THE IMAGE OF HIM THAT
CREATED HIM: Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor
uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: BUT CHRIST IS
ALL, AND IN ALL. Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and

!197
beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness,
longsuffering; Forbearing one another, AND FORGIVING ONE
ANOTHER, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ
forgave you, so also do ye. AND ABOVE ALL THESE THINGS PUT
ON CHARITY, WHICH IS THE BOND OF PERFECTNESS. And let the
peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also ye are called in one
body; and be ye thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in
all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and
hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the
Lord. AND WHATSOEVER YE DO IN WORD OR DEED, DO ALL IN
THE NAME OF THE LORD JESUS, GIVING THANKS TO GOD AND
THE FATHER BY HIM.
—Colossians 3: 9-17, KJB

—=—

But how does one throw or put off the old man and put on the new man? This is simply translated
as throw off the legal person, the strawman, and be reborn back into your True body, mind, and
spirit of Life. Who can possibly deny this to be the essence of peace, of heaven on earth, of the place
where those risen from the dead Live without fear of unspiritual things? And remember, this
notion of giving thanks to Jehovah through the name of christ is not an invitation to worship christ
as God, for Jesus christ is the Son of God, meaning the Word as Law of God. To worship Jehovah
through Jesus christ is to follow the Word of Law (Son) of God in every way. Just as to be a citizen-
ship of any nation is to follow the law (false doctrine) of the gods of that nation, in spite of God’s
Law. One simply cannot in any way be a son of God and also be a son of the nation (false gods of
mammon). For there is no room or place for money in the above verses, no room for judgements or
legal means of collections or punishments, and certainly no room for charging any man for any
intercourse when all deeds should be done in charity alone.

Pretending belief (Love) in God within a corporate religion in member-ship is a declaration of

amoral intent under the civil law of the state, and thus an open agreement to break with God’s
Covenant of Grace. It is a sign that one needs to be governed by man’s legal designs because he
cannot govern himself under God. This is a Loveless relationship with Jehovah. And so to swear an
oath upon the Bible to the court judge (god) when the Bible is clear that no man of God should take
any oath ever to any false god, this is the point where we are tricked into disrespecting God's Word
and embracing the idolatrous gods (magistrates) of the nations. When one swears on the Bible, one
commits blasphemy, no exceptions. But more importantly, this expression signiÞes voluntary
choice to abandon the protections and Laws of God's Nature.

Reality is all of Nature, as that which Exists in and of Itself, as the Creation of God. A lie cannot
change Reality (Creation), and an opinion about God cannot change the Nature of God. Truth is
only manÕs perception of Reality, is a creation only of man, and therefore a lie can be conÞrmed as a
“truth” or a legal “fact” or “law.” Truth can certainly effect the Nature of Reality, but only through
the actions of those who believe in (love) those lies, which we call as “truth” and legal “law.”

Amazingly, most of this deceit and trickery goes on without our contemplation of it, for the devil’s
machine is lubricated with ignorance, complacency, apathy, and idiocracy.

The legal, corporate church and state are only conÞrmed and ratiÞed lies that are our proclaimed
false-truths legally consented to. This is the greatest deception. One either acts religiously (by a

!198
private moral code) or one joins a religious corporation and assumes the ßattering legal title of that
public religion’s name (denomination) without private acts, without actually living by and in a
religious way (under Law). There are those who call themselves by the ßattering title of Christian,
and there are other men who follow the teachings of christ as the primary example of how to Exist
only in the spiritual Realm and Law of God. The later is few and far between. One is a legal title,
one is a Life-style. One is only a word in legalese, one is Real Life. And the difference between these
is like night and day, as darkness and light, God and mammon. America is full of ÒChristiansÓ in
name only, just as all ÒChristianÓ nations exist too in name (noun) form only. Only a sentient,
rational man can follow christ. But the title of ÒChristianÓ is as common as any prostitute. A nation
is an artiÞcial thing, a creation of man, not of God, and therefore opposed to christ despite its
ßattering legal title.

Take away the false, ßattering ÒtruthÓ of names and titles, and whatever is left over is the Reality of
that which has no name. This is the essence of what is Source. Without such a ßattering title, most
who claim to be ÒChristianÓ in this world would be unrecognizable as such, despite their Sunday
and legal state-holiday adventures to some corporation with the title of Òchurch.Ó Most simply do
not act the part they play. Their belief and respect of the legal law (the law of mammon) and its
sanctions prevent it. We go through the motions yet go nowhere, for we are stuck in a legal system
that outlaws morals and estops purely religious actions.

But then there is the other side, as those whom are disenfranchised from these corporate religions
but who have never comprehended the words of the scriptures in any tangible way, thanks to the
church and state’s public education and legalism.

—=—

“An issue requires terms of CONTRADICTION; that is, THERE CAN

BE NO ISSUE WITHOUT AN AFFIRMATIVE (POSITIVE) ON ONE
SIDE AND A NEGATIVE ON THE OTHER.”
—Contestio litis eget terminos contradictaris. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

The christian name (negative) is contradictory to the legal surname (positive). When combined,
when these contradictions (names) are admixed under contract, an issue (legal child) is created
(birthed) and registered.

To be able to make a voluntary, moral decision one must Þrst have the ability to make that choice.
The legal, positive law takes away choice, and instead strictly enforces a set of legally pre-
established law designed to control (govern) our actions without need of premeditation. We
pretend that the ÒlawÓ is somehow moral and just, that such an artiÞcial construct as law may
somehow have values, but this is yet again a self-deceit. For the law is not Living, and cannot make
a choice. It thrives only through the actions and inaction of its agents. It is not self-Evident or self-
Existent, being a creation of manÕs words alone. Only man may act (verb) morally despite his
declared set of words he calls as his morals (noun). Justice has been instilled into the minds of men,
replacing even the possibility of forgiveness as if an eye must without question be taken as sacriÞce
for an eye to satisfy mammon. And so every crime must be made into a payable Þnancial
instrument and invested in the Court Registry Investment System (CRIS). For this strict written law
is enforced not by choice, but by force. And every illegitimate issue brought before the court is
guaranteed to cause the creation of new monetary debt.

I bet you didnÕt know that the court extracts investment money from every single case it receives.
And you wonder why the courts are so happily overcrowded? There is Þnancial incentive to keep
them full! For remember, every crime is a Þnancial one, and every remedy paid must Þrst go

!199
through the court registry and its investment scheme. It goes directly into a treasury account in the
Federal Reserve Bank and Þnally back to the courts for dispersal. Of course the creation and
sustainment of a central bank with an exclusive monopoly on credit and money creation is the
fulÞllment of the 5th plank of the Communist Manifesto. Did I mention that all 10 planks are law in
the United States? Well, thatÕs for another chapterÉ

Yes, the courts openly practice usury on every one of your heads (per capita). For they follow the
old law without that pesky christ and his morals and anti-usury Laws of the New Law getting in
the way. The courts are, for all intents and purposes, just a sophisticated, organized syndicate of
human trafÞckers acting in a legally protected corporate forum. They are literally pirates on the sea
of commerce.

67.2 Deposit of Registry Funds Into Interest-Bearing Account

(b) Investment of Registry Funds - A motion and a proposed order setting forth the manner
in which the funds will be deposited IN AN INTEREST-BEARING ACCOUNT OR
INVESTED IN AN INTEREST-BEARING INSTRUMENT must be submitted prior to the
tender of such funds to the court.

(1) Court Registry Investment System

(A) Unless otherwise ordered, the Court Registry Investment System

(CRIS), administered through the Administrative OfÞce of the United States
Courts, shall be the investment mechanism authorized.

(B) Under CRIS, monies deposited in each case under subsection (a)(1) will
be "pooled" together with those on deposit with the Treasury to the credit of
other courts in CRIS AND USED TO PURCHASE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT
SERIES SECURITIES through the Bureau of Public Debt, which will be held at the
Treasury in an account in the name and to the credit of the Director of Administrative
OfÞce of the United States Courts, hereby designated custodian for CRIS.

(C) A SEPARATE ACCOUNT FOR EACH CASE WILL BE ESTABLISHED in CRIS

titled in the name of the case GIVING RISE TO THE INVESTMENT IN THE
FUND. INCOME GENERATED FROM FUND INVESTMENTS will be distributed
to each case based upon the ratio each account's principal and earnings has to the
aggregate principal and income total in the fund. Reports showing the interest
earned and the principal amounts contributed in each case will be prepared and
distributed to each court participating in CRIS and made available to litigants and/or
their counsel.

—United States District Court, District of New Hampshire website

—=—

To put this complicated, openly secretive investment scheme into perspective, letÕs simply under-
stand that every decision made by a judge creates an instrument of Þnancial value, a remedy in
money to be paid to the apparent winner or as a fee to government. Again, this is the creation of a
monetary instrument with valuable consideration. It is a court document that is worth the value
placed upon it. This ÒinstrumentÓ that is to be paid in the future may be invested for its face value.

If you have ever sat in a typical trafÞc or other lower court of extortion over the ignorant multitude
of goyim, you can literally watch the scam unfold. The judge will ofÞcially rule that an unreason-
able amount is the remedy for the case, say $10,000.00, to be paid as a fee for some municipal
statute being broken, and therefore has just created that amount in a Þnancial instrument with
valuable consideration, as a debt that must be eventually paid. IÕve literally seen and heard judges

!200
scream as they bang their gavel down that, “You owe me $5,000!” Of course that is owed to the
court, not the judge, but we may also Þnd that the judge is the public/private owner of that court
(business).

But then, in what that fake, administrative, pretend judge says is a favor to the loser of that case,
and by the good graces of the state, we are going to only make the loser pay $1,000 of that, just a
mere 10%, for the magistrate god is feeling generous and pitiful today to the prayers (pleas) of his
subjects in agency. And so the victim of extortion walks out of that rape-room feeling lucky that his
person was only charged a small portion of the total extortion amount, and he actually feels good
that the state may only then exact that amount over the whole. And so the “defendant” walks out
in bondage as the surety for that money to be paid to the state by a future date.

And so now, let us examine what is left over…

A single Þnancial instrument worth $10,000.00 may now be invested in the Court Registry
Investment System (CRIS). For though the ÒdefendantÓ will only pay $1,000.00 of that Þnal amount
in the future, the ruling was still the total amount of $10,000.00. Like any corporation, that
corporation calling itself a court will of course write off the difference. But not before it invests the
full value of that Þnancial instrument into its daily pooled investment scheme with the central
bank, the Federal Reserve (the Babylonian Temple).


A second source of CRIS funds comes from corporations, which are forced to deposit funds with
the court to pay for the legal procedure or to settle the case by court order, and thus invested in
Federal Securities until those funds are re-dispersed much later.

From the Attorney General of the District of New Jersey website on the CRIS system we read:

• Market Rate Earnings - The total pool of registry funds earns market rates of return.
Registry funds in CRIS are invested in short-term Treasury securities, thus eliminating any
need for collateral.

How does CRIS operate?

The CRIS registry funds are pooled and used to purchase U.S. Treasury securities. These
securities are held to maturity, and the portfolio is structured so that sufÞcient securities
mature each week to pay out funds for all registry cases settled during the week. Funds are
invested in Government Account Series (GAS) securities under the Bureau of Public Debt's
Federal Investment Program.

How is money deposited with the Court?

Money sent to the Court for deposit into the Court's Registry Fund REQUIRES A COURT
ORDER. Unless otherwise directed, all Registry Funds paid into the Court ARE
DEPOSITED WITH THE TREASURER OF THE UNITED STATES pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
2041 through depositories designated by the Treasury to accept such deposit on its behalf.

How does money get transferred to CRIS?

The Court order MUST direct the transfer of the funds deposited into the Court's Registry
Fund to the Court Registry Investment System (CRIS) administered by the Administrative
OfÞce of the United States Courts. The party making the deposit or transferring funds to the
Court's registry shall serve the order permitting the deposit or transfer on the Clerk of Court,
the Chief Deputy of Administration or the Finance Manager. Money is deposited into CRIS
once weekly on Wednesdays.

What is a designated or qualiÞed settlement fund?

!201
 A registry account may be a designated or qualiÞed settlement fund only if:

• (1) There has been a settlement agreement in the case;

• (2) The court has entered an order establishing or approving a deposit into the registry
as a settlement fund, and
• (3) The liability resolved by the settlement agreement is of a kind described in 26 U.S.C.
468B or 26 C.F.R. 1.468B-1(c).

—Attorney General of the District of New Jersey, website source: http://www.njd.uscourts.gov/cris

—=—

You might be asking right about now just why is this so important?

The question you may wish to ask yourself instead is, how can I possibly receive a fair trial if ad-
ministrative courts operate commercially and thus for proÞt, while judges and other private invest-
ors own and lease out for proÞt to government the buildings those courts are held in? Power
certainly corrupts. But when you add Þnancial gain into the equation, the corruption becomes ab-
solute. And so we have a system that not only incentivizes police to issue more tickets and citations
(exaction), but one that invests all its proceeds for interest gain with the organized central bank of
the nation, and Þnally feeds a public and private, for-proÞt prison industry that incentives the state
and its courts to place more citizen-ships and ÒillegalsÓ in jail, offering slave-labor wages to escape
the monotony and boredom of the caged-life.

What more can I say here. The court system is the main door through which organized, legalized
crime has been made a part of our mob-style daily life. For who may overrule the gods of the law
and of the money? Certainly not a worshiping subject and goyim like you, Mr. strawman.

And so here we Þnd the very deÞnition of legalized lawlessness, of anarchical licensure to break
the Law of Nature and do quite a bit of harm, even while the Bible sits as mere furniture in that
courtroom, a false tribute to that which is pretended to have no authority, and which none of those
charged knows how to read or utilize as his Law. The irony is palatable.

Of course we should not be surprised that these ßatteringly titled ÒjudgesÓ will purposefully and
all but routinely mis-allocate legal Òjustice,Ó judging those not worthy of such harsh judgement, all
to fulÞll the requirements of the Federal government and its central bank in a successful, legal
extortion racket. The transfer of wealth from the poor and middle-class is, in these nation-wide
administrative courts of extortion, the daily business of the devilmasters.

—=—

“The Federal Reserve said Friday it made a record $98.7 billion in proÞts
last year, MOSTLY FROM INTEREST on the more than $4 trillion in
bonds it has purchased since 2008 to stimulate the economy… THE
MONEY, WHICH GOES TO THE U.S. TREASURY, is a silver lining to
the central bank's unprecedented intervention to boost the economy.”
ÑLos Angeles Times, January 9, 2015, from article entitled, ÔFederal Reserve to send record $98.7-billion proÞt to Treasury’

—=—

!202
So what happens when we are summoned like demons to appear before a court, usually through a
trafÞc citation or other ofÞcial information? Firstly, a C.U.S.I.P. number is attached to our case Þle.
For clarity and ease, we will not go into what this means. The reader only need understand that:

—=—

“The CUSIP number is created and owned by the American Bankers

Association, but Standard & Poor's is responsible for daily operations.
The CUSIP number is USED TO IDENTIFY U.S. AND CANADIAN
STOCKS AS WELL AS MUNICIPAL AND GOVERNMENT BONDS
ISSUED IN THE UNITED STATES. The number is made up of nine
characters that are unique to a particular company or stock issuer, and it
can be made up of both letters and numbers.”
Ñreference.com website, listing as sources: investopedia.com, activequote.Þdelity.com, sec.gov

—=—

But why, you still foolishly ask, would a number like this be placed upon my case? To answer this, I
can only point you to the numbered, unique tags that are placed on the ears of livestock, of
numbered beasts of burden. ItÕs just human capital management. The CUSIP is merely a numbered
(marked) beast of burden placed upon every Þctional certiÞcate (identity) that may be extorted for
money.

For clarity, hereÕs the S.E.C. explanation:

CUSIP Number: CUSIP stands for Committee on Uniform Securities IdentiÞcation

Procedures. A CUSIP number identiÞes most Þnancial instruments, including: stocks of all
registered U.S. and Canadian companies, commercial paper, and U.S. government and
municipal bonds. The CUSIP system (formally known as CUSIP Global Services)Ñowned by
the American Bankers Association and managed by Standard & PoorÕsÑFACILITATES THE
CLEARANCE AND SETTLEMENT PROCESS OF SECURITIES.

CUSIP numbers consist of nine characters (including letters and numbers) that uniquely
identify a company or issuer AND THE TYPE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT. A similar
system is used to identify foreign securities (CUSIP International Numbering System or CINS).
CINS employs the same nine character identiÞer as CUSIP, but also contains a letter in the Þrst
position to signify the issuer's country or geographic region…

—U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Website on the CUSIP number

—=—

So why have you never heard of this before?

For one reason, attorneys keep this a secret from their clients, and judges are just the dirtiest of
deviling attorneys in black robes.

But the real problem is that you have never before been told that you are the Òlive stockÓ of the US
government, Living stock certiÞed, monetized, and numbered at birth so that all sorts of human
capital can be extorted through your strawman and surety to its false personas and titles. Again,
this is the franchise of freedom called citizen-ship.

!203
Just what did you think they meant in government when they offered you the beneÞt of security in
exchange for subjection? And what do you think is meant when the United Nations and the Pope
offers the same thing, as international peace and security?

In this process of legal crime, now that the case is ready to be monetized and securitized through
the CUSIP and CRIS systems, the agent appears before the court because the legal person
(strawman/property of the state) was summoned, and that agent for service of process (that’s you)
is required by law to answer said summons when the devil rings, unless one chooses to pay the
exaction fee attached to that summons (ticket) so as to bypass the hassle of going to appear before
that kangaroo in a black moo-moo pretending god-ship in a ßattering legal title. Each ticket or
other legal document creates a case Þle, and most cases must be securitized by federal law. This
securitization occurs once the case has come to a decision, and a monetary value for remedy is
attached as the Þnal judgment. Generally unbeknownst to the common, goyim standing there
dumbfounded by the whole process like cattle lead to slaughter, the defendant is thus held to be in
bond, and thus as the agent responsible for the charged legal person, stands as surety for that
monetary judgement or fee to be paid at a future time. Thus, the now charged person and its agent
is allowed to go free (to continue in his legal franchise of subjection in national citizen-ship) instead
of being held and incarcerated. In other words, the body of the man (as acting agent) becomes the
collateral to pay that which is promised under that judgement debt. Until that point, when the debt
promise is Þnally paid in full as promised by the surety and it appears in the fund accounts and
registry of the court, only then is the CRIS investment scheme complete, for the Þnancial
instrument (promise to pay) is now discharged. The longer the court allows the charge to be paid
off, the longer that Þnancial instrument can remain invested and collecting interest as a federal,
non-collateralized security guaranteed by the rest of the taxpayers (agents/collaborators).

But let us go no further here, for we Þnd the 9-digit CUSIP on each denomination of the dollar bill
and on the back of each Social Security Card (in red), for these are of course just other forms of
Þnancial instruments in the whole investment scheme. It just gets more technical from here, and we
need not eat more of that useless fruit. We will discuss further and give evidence of what it is to be
Òlive stockÓ (peopled humans) at some future point in this work.

The point IÕd like to make here is that none of this organized criminal behavior or the victimization
we suffer because of it could happen if and when the New Law, the New Testament, the very
foundational principles of common law as the spiritual Word (Son) would be followed. There
would be no money, no persons, no ßattering titles (judges), no extortion, and thus no gain or proÞt
to be made off of the backs of manÕs labor and ignorance. I cannot stress this point enough, and
hope that the reader is at this point starting to realize the error of his own choice of law, and
subsequently, his choice in the legal gods and in mammon. For if you havenÕt realized it yet, the
system we just described is the very black heart and soul of modern Babylon, an ancient system
that the New Testament (Law) defeats. But only each of us independently and also in support of
one another as spiritually awakened men may defeat this system by following christ as the
foundation of the common Law. For we, each and every one, have that wonderful curse that is
power to choose.

And so by custom and without conscious thought we bear our issue, our child, immediately
registering it in a contradiction of certiÞed terms, unnaturally admixing the positive legal surname
with the negative christian Þrst name. The innocent is charged with the felony of birth, becoming
the potential agent in surety for that burden of personhood, a contractual relation-ship that is
induced and attached to the Social Security and other aspects of one's full identiÞcation matrix. We
sign in its name as its surety and use it as our false, securitized identity. Thus, oneÕs whole life is
lived in a contradiction through public (legal) and private (moral, spiritual) personalities. When an
issue arises in court, one agent of a Þctional (legal) person afÞrms and accuses the other, declaring
positively that some legal crime has been committed. He who positively afÞrms must make proof,
for the opposing party to that afÞrmation stands negatively and thus uncharged (without assigned
guilt) until proven by the afÞrmer of that positive claim. Even to appear in court as either party 




!204
(person) in any case, one must present himself as the legal person (admixed positive and negative
name) or agent (attorney) thereof or there is no issue before the court, unless the court proceeds
without appearance at its discretion.

For future reference, the word issue can mean:

1) Progeny, a Child, in genealogy

2) An Order from the court

3) Money

4) An event (as legal birth) or consequence
5) Something delivered for use
5) “In law, the close or result of pleadings; the point of matter depending in suit, on which the
parties join, and put the case to trial by a jury.” (Webs1828)

—=—

A Real baby is considered as the Natural or negative aspect of the issue, born through the
evacuation and discharge of the actual mothers womb, while consequently a child (legal person) is
the positively (artiÞcially) created issue of the state based on the vital statistics of that birth/
delivery event, residing as a charge (burden) in an artiÞcial womb (matrix) called as the United
States district. The issue (legal child/person) is birthed (abandoned) from the delivery room, a
consequence of an actual live birth event (of a man), and that issue is thus certiÞed as a legal person
of (belonging to) the United States. Remember, this is the legal language. Think not in terms of
Nature, for the legal realm deals only with its own legal persons, places, and things (nouns/
names). Man is property of no one. But the persons (issues) of man are always property, as legal
vessels. It is this adjoining of the two realms, the Living and the dead, that cause the legal event
and issue. But always remember which is the Realm of God, and that we may be reborn back into
our Natural Life:

—=—

“He that is our God (‘el) is the God (‘el) of salvation; and unto GOD
(JEHOVAH) the Lord (Adonay) BELONG THE ISSUES FROM DEATH.”
—Psalms 68:20, KJB

—=—

As strange as this deciphering of scripture becomes, this phrase “the issues from death” is another
way of expressing the notion of being “born again.” For how is one issued from death lest he al-
ready be dead of the spirit? One is born back, delivered back into NatureÕs care and Law.

Here we Þnd the word issue being translated inversely from the legal form, which is to say that to
be delivered back unto GodÕs Nature and Law is to be issued from the death of the Þction of legal
law in civil life. The word issue is Strong's #H8444 - towtsa’ah - and carries the meaning from the
GeseniusÕ Hebrew-Chaldean Lexicon as Òto go out; (1) “a going out, metaphorically, A GOING
FORTH FROM DANGER, DELIVERANCE; (2) the place from which (any person or thing) goes
forth, hence a gate, a fountain, i.e. Ôthe fountain of life,Õ of happiness; ALSO THE PLACE OF THE
EXIT OR TERMINATION OF ANY THING.Ó StrongÕs also deÞnes this as ISSUING OR
ESCAPING FROM DEATH and/or FROM BORDERS.

This concept of going forth from danger will be covered later, however it is important to note here
that as an artful word in legalese, this term of art danger means the legal jurisdiction of a master
(false god). In other words, we are to go forth from the nations and cities of that legal realm of

!205
Þction (e.g., danger) and back to God's Realm and Law of Nature. Danger is a term of insurance,
and there is no such danger or for that matter pretended insurances in mammon under God.

But where could a place without borders possibly be, for all legal places certainly have such legal
borders? Of course, in the Þction, those borders may by force hold only Þctional personas, straw-
men not men; as those who are not self-governed. He who is not detached from that persona will
get stuck at the border. In Nature, no borders Exist for the christ-like man. To escape from these
jurisdictions of danger requires us to follow the Higher Law, that Natural Law which trumps all
others made by the hands and minds of men. Hopefully, as happened with the author, the reader is
beginning to comprehend more fully that the Bible is not religion, but the foundational Law of
Nature. In other words, Its design is strictly to keep us from leaving Nature into Þction, from
blemishing our Natural mind, body, and soul with artiÞcial constructs, beliefs, and laws. If that is
what is called as True religion, then sign me up!

And so inversely to these false religions that believe in forms and images without substance, this
other side that believes ardently in GodÕs totality of non-Existence is thus only a state of the most
ridiculous foolishness, for to acknowledge as truth a lack of the Existence of anything as something
tangibly believable in, as if nothingness has substance, and thus perceivably forcing that apparently
non-Existent thing to be absent from consideration as a sort of alternative God-less religion, is to
create a God out of nothingness. It is to believe in a negative as being a positive, knowing that the
negative cannot be proven to ever achieve a positive state of existence. While God cannot be proven
in the positive, the lack of God can also not be proven in the negative. This is seemingly a paradox.
But it is the most important aspect of all law and the key to Natural Freedom. For that which is
forced, imagined, or brainwashed not to exist in the minds of men cannot also be said to positively
(with proof) not Exist in Reality as a false truth. Perception, especially that which is created in the
mind from words, doesnÕt dictate the Nature of Reality or cause it to Exist or not Exist. Description
only creates form, not substance. A negative cannot create a positive. To attempt to prove a
negative, as the fact that God does not Exist, is to attempt to do that which is known to be
impossible, and is thus a vain and foolish pursuit. These are the foundations and principles of law.

Of course, it is equally as absurd to attempt to prove the positive Existence of God. If your life
pursuit is to prove that God Exists, then this is yet another vain and fallacious pursuit. For
Existence Itself in all Its various substance is what is called as the Oneness of God (Jehovah) in the
Bible. Existence Exists without any vain, Þctional proofs of man, as the negative state of the One-
ness of all Being. In other words, proof of Existence is Existence Itself. To attempt to prove God as
that which is external from Existence is the master lie of the many denominations of the Roman
religion. For only that which is adversarial (satanic) to Nature, to the True and unblemished
Existence of all Life and Being, including the legal church and state, is external from God's Nature.
Corporations, persons, are external from the Reality of Nature.



I certainly hope against hope that as we tear down each of these false paradigms, that of the
corporately titled ÒChristianÓ and that of its resulting antithesis Òatheist,Ó that we can then come
together and see that what is left is only the Bible and what it actually says. Plain reason declares
that God's Nature and all of Creation needs neither your belief or your non-belief to Exist, nor for
you to Exist within. It needs not your religion, your opinion, nor your law. It needs not your limit-
ed vocabulary, philosophies, sciences, nor mathematics. In fact, It needs nothing at all from you to
Exist. The great lesson here is that we all need It to Exist! And so we damned well better start
respecting and following that which is the Law of Existence, the Law of God, for they are one and
the same. To worship and protect All of Nature and Creation and ourselves as part of Oneness is to
worship God monotheistically; the One True God. In other words, to worship only what is self-
evident Truth is to worship Jehovah.

To use a prop, it is at those times when we spiritually contemplate and conceptualize the end of
space without even the consideration of religion that we are most fully contemplating the Oneness
of the God of all Existence. To consider then that the ÒCreatorÓ of that inÞnite space (Creation) is 




!206
somehow outside and external from that unbounded Reality of ever-continuing Existence, as some
eternal watcher of all of our actions within like a chicken laying an egg, is beyond reason. For
Creation Is what Is and what shall eternally Be.

Of course, the false doctrines and ßatteringly titled ÒfathersÓ of the church would say that my
words are blasphemy. And they would be right, for I speak against their own false teachings, not
against that of the True scriptures and Jehovah. Sadly, this means that the agents of these false
religions, the agentic ÒChristianÓ that has joined himself with one of man's positively created
ÒChristianÓ corporations (artiÞcial persons), will also follow their church doctrine and false
teachings instead of the Bible.

—=—

“Negative facts are not proof.”

—Factum negantis nulla probatio. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“No one is bound to do what is impossible.”

A l'impossible nul n'est tenu. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 601. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“The law requires nothing impossible.”

Lex non cogit impossibilia. Co. Litt. 231, b; 1 Bouv. Inst. n. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

Let's follow the logic hereÉ

It is impossible to prove a negative, meaning that Reality is not a fact in law (Þction).

The law cannot require what is impossible (from its agents).

He who follows the scriptural teachings of christ acts only ever in a negative way, possessing only
negative facts.

Thus, he who follows christ (GodÕs Word) cannot be proven to legally (positively/artiÞcially) exist,
for the Word of God says never respect persons.

That which cannot be proven (a negative) cannot be in legal consideration a positive thing.

A negative, as that what is in Nature Real and self-Existent, is that which cannot be proven to
legally exist, and so cannot be bound by what is a positively declared law, which requires proof of
legal (artiÞcial/positive) existence under that artful law. That which negatively Exists (as part of
what is the already self-Existent Reality of Nature) cannot be positively proven to have a legal
existence without some ad-diction.

And now we may know why God's Word (Law/Son) respects no Þction, no person, no ßattering
titles, and no marks, images, idols, or symbology, all of which are not self-evident Truths. So why
do you?

!207
A man of God, a follower of christ’s example under God’s Law at all times, is only ever considered
by man's law to be in a negative (Pure) Existence without legal (positive) defect or dis-ease. A man
of God is thus immune from other men’s legally imposed positive laws, for his actions never em-
brace or fall under them as his actions are always negatively charged. In other words, he never acts
in the person (property) of any other but that of his own God-given vessel, which he treats and
respects only as the unblemished temple of God that It Is. Without legal persona in attachment,
bond, and surety to any man, no legal capacity may be found, and so no positive charge may be
laid upon that man. Thus the power of God may only be found when man has both feet planted
Þrmly on the soil (Creation), so that all artiÞcial, legal charges ßow directly in, through, and
immediately out of him and into the Earth (Jehovah), where they dissipate into the nothingness
they always were. But the second one slips up and assumes a legal form or name of any kind, he is
no longer grounded by God’s foundation of Law and unspottedness, for he suddenly has a positive
capacitor that may charge his soul with syn (sin). Once legally charged, no man may Þnd ground
again, for one's charged legal persona is like bearing a permanent rubber sole in a performance
debt, and so one must Þnd one's way back to God by discharging and thus executing the legal
person (contract). The strawman (civil life) in each of us must die a civil death (end of contractual
relation-ship) so that each one of us may attain a solely spiritual Existence and Life always ground-
ed in Reality. For clarity, what is positive is always fiction; an addition to what is a negative (Real).

Like electricity, as on a car battery, the legal creators of man’s law ground the negative ßow of
God’s energy and promote only their own separate, positive charge. A man of God utilizes only the
much more powerful negative charge, while grounding the positive energy of man’s legal Þction so
as to overcome it. In this analogy, the positive and the negative are akin to the power of the gods,
and we may only be under and be charged with one god at one time while necessarily abandoning
the other. Why can we have only one god? Try grabbing a positive and negative wire at the same
time and you will understand (not recommended). The positive charge represents debt and
servitude to other men. The negative charge represents only the authority of God's Nature as the
Source of all True power and Life. When the negative (Jehovah) is grounded and ignored, man's
will and choice is limited by capacitors (incapacitations) set as legal laws by other men who seek to
harness and use that power of choice for themselves by robbing it from all others through causality.
Their lapdog is of course the BAR Associations Þlled with advocates for the devil, as that which
adversarially bars man from his own Nature. It is only when man grounds the positive charge of
debt and subjection to only that closed-loop system and jurisdiction (place) of legal (artiÞcial)
things that the power of all of Nature and Its God is realized by man, for the man comes again (is
reborn) into Nature (Source) and recognizes his place therein, leaving all legal Þctions and lies
behind. The man is not necessarily then protected by Nature, but becomes instead the protector of
Nature (Source), including his own. But to be reborn is only to become once again what we were
originally and innocently born as, by stripping all artiÞcial, legal considerations and names of that
false, positive law from our spiritual Nature. Thus we can understand the legalism that a
(performance) debt of citizen-ship may never be actually paid off with money, its charge (felony)
must instead be discharged. The person (contractual relationship) must be executed (fully per-
formed). This end of contract is called solution. And there is only one actual solution in law: END
OF CONTRACT!

The negative law is God's Law alone, called as the Law and Laws of Nature. Man's law is only ever
that which is positively declared as external from God's Law and Nature. These laws (statutes) of
men are therefore always lies told as legal truths, for what is not of Nature is never to be mistaken
as self-Evident Truth. Only positive things have effect in this legal realm, for what is positively
established is without exception a creation of man. And so only when the positive is respected over
the negative, art over Nature, form over substance, man over God; at this point alone may the
ßattering titles and crowns of the fabled genealogies of men be respected as positive gods over that
of his True, negative (Natural) Creator (Source). A legal claim made over a positive matter (legal
Þction) must be proven to artiÞcially relate and be attached to that which is in Reality of a negative
substance (God’s Creation). For cattle this valuation is an involuntary action, while for men this is
purely a voluntary action. Fiction must be respected (believed in) to positively exist, and only that
respect of artiÞciality in name, title, and under law can cause the positive (resource) to be in control

!208
over the negative (Source). In other words, he who makes a claim or who afÞrms to some legally
created concept (person, place, thing, or fact) is always in the position of proving his positive claim.
Since what is of self-evidence and self-Existence, as what is negative needs no proofs, it is only the
liar, the believer (lover) in positive Þctional nonsense that must prove the artful existence of his
Þctions. Be it the man acting in self-Existence under God's Law in a negative fashion or the man
accused of something sanctioned under the positively created law of man, this man has no
requirement to prove anything, for a negative cannot be proved and has nothing to prove. This
man has made no afÞrmation, only his accuser has, and he who afÞrms anything positive must
prove his afÞrmation. He who stands accused without public persona need not do or say anything,
as in keeping with the story of christ, who admitted to no legal names or titles for himself. Legal
status is only ever a positive charge of debt, a contract requiring public performance under what is
called a Òsocial contract.Ó A follower of christ stands only in negative Law, which is only ever GodÕs
Supreme Law, and stands without the desires of positive afÞrmations or considerations, never
claiming them as his false legalistic reality. For there are no True, spiritual rewards therein.

To be clear, and to put these opposing charges into a perfection of usage, the negative Law means
only that man has the Highest (God-given, unalienable) right to be left alone in all cases, but only if
he should walk the righteous, lawful path exempliÞed as God's Word (Son), which is the right to
not be positively charged by the lies of men in Þction, to not be forced or hindered, and to not have
his negative rights and tenements trampled upon. This means only that the negative right to not be
imposed upon carries with it the equal and correlative duty to act accordingly in exact sameness to
all other men, no matter their pretended title. The simple duty to Òdo no harmÓ is the implied
underpinning and foundation of the negative law, or GodÕs Law. To act negatively is to never
attempt to enforce manÕs legalistic law against any other, and to claim no right to harm anotherÕs
privacy by invoking any public (positive) legal character, persona, or ßattering title. Inversely, the
positive law is designed to positively enforce the fact that man has the right in his legal status
(person) and license to harm another public person in the simulation of agency, to trespass and to
impose upon that which does Exist in Nature by invoking the false authority and law of that which
does not. Another word for positive is public, and it is only manÕs voluntarily contracted public,
legal capacity that allows the public law to positively effect his person, which indirectly effects him.
Through the person (public, positive law status) of the man as a public member (citizen-ship) of the
public society required to perform the functions and obey the law of persons, the man is therefore
also considered only as a public-minded person, as property of the state. A public (positively
created) person has no protections from the negative, unalienable (God-given) rights and duties
implied by GodÕs Law of Nature, for a public person is only ever the property of another, standing
opposed to God and to self-responsibility, and thus opposed to a negative Existence. It is not the
opinion of the man that counts, only his actions according to his attached person under legal
sanction. He either acts negatively or positively. He cannot be in both states of opposing ßow at the
same time, needing to ground (abandon) the ßow of energy he does not invoke. And once he
assumes a positive, legal existence, he cannot invoke his True God (Source) nor act in the self-
evident Law of his True Nature. The positive law has its own creators, thus recognizing only the
authority of its own gods (source). The positive law cannot exist without diverting the negative
elsewhere, thus denying the subject of that Highest Law.

—=—

“In immediate self-consciousness the simple ego is absolute object,

which, however, is for us or in itself absolute mediation, AND HAS AS
ITS ESSENTIAL MOMENT SUBSTANTIAL AND SOLID
INDEPENDENCE. THE DISSOLUTION OF THAT SIMPLE UNITY IS
THE RESULT OF THE FIRST EXPERIENCE; THROUGH THIS THERE
IS POSITED A PURE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS, AND A
CONSCIOUSNESS WHICH IS NOT PURELY FOR ITSELF, BUT FOR

!209
 ANOTHER, i.e., AS AN EXISTENT CONSCIOUSNESS,
CONSCIOUSNESS IN THE FORM AND SHAPE OF THINGHOOD.
Both moments are essential, since, in the Þrst instance, they are unlike
and opposed, and their reßexion into unity has not yet come to light,
THEY STAND AS TWO OPPOSED FORMS OR MODES OF
CONSCIOUSNESS. THE ONE IS INDEPENDENT WHOSE
ESSENTIAL NATURE IS TO BE FOR ITSELF, THE OTHER IS
DEPENDENT WHOSE ESSENCE IS LIFE OR EXISTENCE FOR
ANOTHER. THE FORMER IS THE MASTER, OR LORD, THE LATTER
IS THE BONDSMAN.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, from ‘The Phenomenology of Spirit’ (1807)

—=—

Man, while acting self-consciously, is acting negatively (not through the property or bond of an-
other). Man's christian name (Þrst name) is also negative, Being illustrative only of the Gift of Life
(as Creation) given by the Creator God (Jehovah). Man's legal surname (last name) in ad-mixture
(contract) with that negative Þrst (christian) name is a positive creation of man's law. Remember,
the maxim of law states that the creator controls. What this really means is that the law of the creator
controls its own creation. Man acts either in negative (Natural) Creation under God's Law or in
positive (Þctional) creation (property) of another god (creator), but never both. Thus man cannot
claim God-given negative rights when he is acting in a positively created legal persona of another
god and artful system of law. He will be shocked every time due to his mishandling of the op-
posing ßow of the energy currents that make up the Law. Legal persons can never have or claim
God-given rights, any more than a man of God may lay his stake in man's legal Þction and realm.

Non-belief in God (Nature as Creation) requires an exerted effort to positively (artiÞcially) ignore
that which is obvious and self-evident, as the dis-belief in Nature Itself. It is not the image or form
of ÒGodÓ we are attempting to distinguish here, as that which the corporate church fearfully pro-
motes in its idolatry, but instead only the concept that man is not God and thus not the ÒCreatorÓ of
himself or of his Natural Environment (Source), and that man is of course certainly not the Entirety
of all inÞnite Space and Time. And so the Natural Law (the Law of Source) is also certainly not a
creation of man, but is the very limits and wonders of the Existence of Life. It is the preeminent,
permanent Law of substance. This Law of God is not in Reality a choice, but is the very Existing,
Living Design and glue of all Life. What the reader considers in idolatry and imagery as his or her
ÒGodÓ is not the purpose of this work. For a picture is worth exactly 1,000 words and nothing else.
Words have no substance, and so may re-present only the nothingness they came from. An image is
always dead. There is no image of God, for God is the Living timelessness, and a single image is
restricted to a single moment in time. And so the foundation of spiritual Law is to put faith in no
other gods, no other idols, for none of these dead things may reveal eternal Life. The purpose of
this work is to make clear that the readerÕs relationship to ÒGodÓ is what conÞrms or denies the
ability for any man to positively (legally but un-Lawfully) effect and harm another man by his
belief and respect of the otherÕs legal Þction of law. Be very clear here that gods (any higher
authority) will always exist in the minds and imaginations of some men, most of them as political
ofÞces and ßattering titles of church and state. But it is only what man chooses to believe in (love)
that either protects or subjects him to the will of those other Þctional gods. Yet all of these legal and
ecclesiastical gods claim their god-ship from one and only one thing, which is the authority of the
One True Permanent God of man and all of Nature. It is manÕs choice of action that decides his god,
not his mere vulgar belief or false show, and certainly not his accident of birth. To believe in God
but act in legal Þction against God is a choice, for the only evidence of any choice made is when it 




!210
is put into action. The title means nothing without the works. One is either a master of himself or
he is the bondservant of another. And try as he may, his actions and his words always reveal his
True status.

And yet those same people who positively claim to be Godless easily believe in and follow the
Þction of government law and its gods as if it were a Reality, a thing of Nature, stating that itÕs just
the way it is, or that it’s always been that way, as if manÕs law was a part of the self-evident Creation
Itself, existing throughout that theorized primordial ooze and volcanic spew of pre-human Life. To
be Godless is to be Lawless (without a Source of Law), and to be without a God is to allow oneself
to fall prey to false gods, which call themselves as kings, presidents, governors, and popes, all of
which rule in the name and in stead of the God that apparently, somehow doesnÕt Exist.

This is where the author used to unreasonably stand before actually reading the one thing that is
ignored by both of these unreasonable sides; the actual words of the Bible. Please know that these
statements are purely ones of spiritually guarded reason and logic, and not at all a corporate
ÒreligiousÓ sentiment. To understand manÕs legal creation of law, we must understand GodÕs Law
of Creationism as its opposing force, for each system is overlaid as the otherÕs contradistinction.
Most fail to grasp the purpose of legal law because they fail to grasp the purpose of GodÕs Law
(Natural Law) as Its foundation and opposition. But logic and reason without spirituality is merely
a state of spiritual death disguised by an overpowering ego and spiritual dissonance, which is the
source of cognitive dissonance. This state of spiritual defeat (death) in false dialectic (logic) is the
very foundation of all the various forms of manÕs law. It is the cause of manÕs disrespect,
detachment, and destruction of his Source, which is the foundational essence of his spirituality, his
Nature.

Ever notice that in every war and in every nation, each nation is somehow the one blessed by
“God?”

Only a spiritually dead man can be tricked into becoming a citizen of any nation, for the law of
nations is purely of a Godless, legal form, having no actual substance. This notion will be
expounded upon throughout this work, as we uncover the source of legalism and the logicians that
Þrst created it long ago as a system of law; in that time and history labeled as before christ. The
author is here again just the messenger of that which has already been realized and expressed in
past times, so that perhaps a revival of the most revered and now artfully occulted mysteries (that
which is held hostage in secret) of spiritual knowledge may manifest and be uncovered in
revelation (apocalypse, an uncovering) in these present times.

More importantly, we must know that this state of induced insanity (non-belief in God) is very
desirable by those legal gods who seek control over all men and thus all of Nature. For to believe in
a god of nothingness (that there is no Creator of Creation, no God of Nature) is to acknowledge that
the legal Þction as positive law must be supreme over any notion of a Higher ÒunwrittenÓand
spiritual Law of God (the negative law), which is apparently non-existent in legal parlance, and
where only manÕs design and law of artiÞce and Þction exists as a Þctional, virtual reality (the false
god; the big lie). This is to say that by tricking men through word magic into disrespecting their
duty to God and Nature as Its protector and steward, only then may they poison and destroy the
very land, air, and sea that is manÕs duty to God to protect. Instead, we sit back, paciÞed, watching
in horror and praying instead of acting.

The Real irony, in this authorÕs opinion, is that it requires much more imagination and mental effort
to not believe in God than to believe, for God and Nature are One and the Same concept; Reality as
Nature Itself Existing in a state of obvious self-evidence. To cause one not to believe in what is
obvious is certainly a trick of these devils and their magical words. I laugh, of course, at my former
despoiled and spotted self, so blind to the very self-evident Nature and Design I was denying. But
then, I was never led to comprehend God as anything but a Þctional name (noun) existing somehow
external from Nature, as some man in the clouds keeping a list only slightly more complex than
Santa Claus apparently keeps, simply because nobody (especially the priest-class) ever told me

!211
otherwise. I listened to the spewed vomit of fools instead of going to the Source myself, as even the
Bible instructs. I gambled on the doctrines (laws) of men delivered with self-loving care and
ceremonial dress in that deceptive language of fools, the predicators of dog-Latin.

—=—

“BUT IN VAIN THEY DO WORSHIP ME, TEACHING FOR

DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN. And he called the
multitude, and said unto them, Hear, and understand: Not that which
goeth into the mouth deÞleth a man; but that which cometh out of the
mouth, this deÞleth a man.”
—Matthew 15: 9-11, KJB

—=—

“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. FOR
MEN SHALL BE LOVERS OF THEIR OWN SELVES, covetous,
boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful,
unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers,
incontinent, Þerce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady,
highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; HAVING A
FORM OF GODLINESS, BUT DENYING THE POWER THEREOF:
FROM SUCH TURN AWAY. For of this sort are they which creep into
houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with
divers lusts, EVER LEARNING, AND NEVER ABLE TO COME TO
THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH.”
—2 Timothy 3: 1-7, KJB

—=—

What comes out of the mouths of men are only words. Those words can be Truths, false truths, or
outright lies. These words can either build the spirit or deÞle it. But True knowledge of anything is
deeper and more tangible than words alone may deliver, and the common tongue of the publicly
educated multitude under the doctrines of men virtually ensures our words will deÞle everything
we speak towards, even by the simple and seemingly innocent respect of those legal, proprietary
names and surnames we call each part of NatureÕs Whole. We deÞle all things Real through names
(nouns) without realizing it. And through this word-trickery, our worship of the Real is twisted into
the worship of artiÞce, of form and image over substance and Source. We apply furniture to the
body, as with make-up and even religious jewelry, to alter our appearance into something that is
our false self, a performance mask (persona) for a character we pretend to love as the Þctional self.
We focus on this outward self-appearance and use it for show in our public, civil lives, calling its
dead character as a ÒChristianÓ or ÒatheistÓ among many other styles and ßattering titles purely for
show in a self-conÞdence game. We dress up both mentally and physically to impress ourselves
and others, loving that artiÞcial self that everyone else seems to see through but us. Of course, all
that matters in mammon and to the devils that run the great legal lie is that we love (believe in) and
respect that externally presented show of self (personiÞcation) over our True Nature. The entirety

!212
of the legal system and law must promote such false love (belief) of external things, leading to a
hatred of (non-belief in) our True inner beauty of Self.

Again, please know that these are not “religious” concepts per se, but a necessary understanding
and acknowledgement of the Natural Law and the speciÞc permanent power it always has over
temporary legal, Þctional considerations. The Source of Creation is Supreme and Highest, the parts
of Creation Itself secondary to the Source. This is to say that the only way to escape from men
acting as gods is to acknowledge a Higher Authority; a God that cannot be re-presented and thus
never defeated even symbolically through the artiÞce and Þctions of man. And so by
acknowledging a SpeciÞc Creator of man and all of Nature, man can never qualify his attempts to
play god while at the same time invoking the Supremacy of his own Creator as his justiÞcation to
rule in that CreatorÕs name. Only GodÕs Law of Nature is always Supreme over any other form of
law, for only GodÕs Word (the Law not made of words) stands as the self-evident Truth of Reality.

But the contract symbolically kills God and establishes positive law! This must be comprehended.
Again, the devils (evil geniuses) may only intervene in Nature by obtaining two things from man,
his contracted consent to fraud (legal artiÞce) and subsequently his symbolic abandonment of God.
This is to say that Law is never automatic. It must be lived!

This is the foundation: a return to GodÕs Design in Nature, which equates to the facing of Reality by
turning away from that artiÞce of legal Þction and leaving the artiÞcially warm comfort of so many
lies. This is the only solution. For again, the word solution in legal parlance means one and only one
thing: end of contract. And end of contract is simply the end of legal dis-ease and burden of debt
(forced performance). Solution is the devilÕs nightmare, for such adversarial, legal lies can only exist
through that medium of ink on paper, subsisting only by manÕs unnatural mark and sig-nature.

To act christ-like, as according to those scriptural teachings, is to Exist only in and as GodÕs
Creation of Nature. But the false gods have mirrored those words in their own false creation of the
legal world, and so these Bible verses have a duel meaning depending upon perspective and legal
status. It is a choice between the God of Nature and the gods of the legal mammon (money) system.

—=—


“For IN HIM WE LIVE and MOVE and HAVE BEING…”

—Acts 17: 28, KJB

—=—

This verse certainly does not separate in any way God (Creator) from Nature (Creation). Life
happens, is born into, and dies as part of the continuing Life cycle of eternal Creation. If we Live,
move, and have being in God (Him), then how can we pray to that which is not Him? And so how
can we possibly separate and externalize these two concepts of Creator and Creation when they are
so obviously One and the same? How can God be external from Creation (Nature) if we Live and
move in It (Him)? Ask the churchÉ For the answer lies in the dog-Latin trickery and literalist
doctrine taught within religious corporations. And then ask the state, which allows the most
horriÞc crimes and legal licensure (anarchy) against Nature (Creation) while at the same time
acknowledging It as God, like parasites justifying the destruction of their host. And yet these moral
problems are solved if we can be made to believe that God (Creator) is outside of and detached
somehow from Its own Nature (Creation). And so we must be convinced as well that man is
similarly detached from Jehovah, that man is not part of the Oneness of God (Creator), but only
part of Creation. While we can never take ourselves out of the Reality (Nature) we are born into, we
can certainly pretend to via legal, scientiÞc, and artful (technological) means. This land of make-
believe is called the legal Þction, which is of course governed by the corporate agents and
magistrates of church and state.

!213
As for the use of “Him” in reference to God, we must remember that the masculine and the
feminine nature of the illustrative “romantic” form of language has been all but removed from the
common dog-Latin. It used to be that each word was considered in the masculine or the feminine.
This has nothing to do with sexism or modern day prejudice, but was and still is the foundation of
language in may dialects. In English, dog-Latin, the poetic verse of the illustrative Latin was
replaced by the descriptive word it. This word it is speciÞcally designed to express neutral gender,
and is also called as a demonstrative (not illustrative) term of art. It is also considered as a non-
personal term.

—=—

“Long ago, English was like many other languages in that EVERY
NOUN HAD A GENDER, masculine, feminine, or neuter, and a
pronoun’s gender was determined by the gender of the noun it referred
to. The possessive pronoun for neuter nouns was “his” (April with his
sweet showers). BUT WHEN ENGLISH BEGAN TO LINK HIS AND
HER ONLY TO ACTUAL MALES AND FEMALES, “his” for objects
seemed increasingly wrong and “it” with no “s” began to be used (April
with it sweet showers). Around 1600, “it’s” began to be used (April with
it’s sweet showers), and it had an apostrophe just like a possessive noun
would… The version without the apostrophe only became dominant in
the 18th century, probably because “it’s” was taking on a new role,
replacing the contraction “tis.” Tis here became it’s here…”
—Emily Brewster, Associate Editor, Merriam-Webster

—=—

And so we Þnd that the use of this word ÒHimÓ as a descriptive substitute for the masculine word
God was intended merely as the correct grammar in the correct language structure, and even so
within the origins of Old English. In these modern times of gender identity crisis, it is no wonder
that a man that identiÞes as legally a Òwo-manÓ would fall victim to the logical fallacy that God is
“unfairly” being portrayed as a man instead of a woman (womb-man), as if God and Nature has an
actual, literal gender. While in Latin and other illustrative, poetic languages of verse this usage is
perfectly acceptable, the increasingly droll and literalist English-speaking goyim of America have
been entrained to insist on assigning this ridiculous political correctness to spiritual matters. Like
the fallacious foundation of atheism, again we Þnd that the entire debate on whether ÒGodÓ is male
or female in imagery and form stems from a surprisingly pure ignorance of language structure and
proper use of grammar. The use of the masculine “Him” to describe God merely references the
concept of the Latin dominus, which means “a lord,” as opposed to the feminine domina, which is “a
mistress.” The masculine usage in grammar does not refer to sexuality, only to the historical
dominance of power, which traditionally is attributed to the male disposition. Femininity is so
deÞned as a lack of male characteristics, which to most sane females is certainly a compliment.
Thus to refer to Jehovah in the gender-masculine phraseology was merely the proper use of
language, not a sexist notion. We have dog-Latin, that is modern English, to thank for such
nonsensical debate as the supposed gender role of God!

And, as stated before, the author herein makes no apologies for using the term “his” to properly
describe all men, both male and female, as this term signiÞes the power of man in one's True
substance not according to gender. The use of gender-based nouns presents the harmony of Nature
in language, assigning the illustrative qualities of both the masculine and feminine character and

!214
strengths upon inanimate things. To deny these qualities, these Natural characteristics of both the
male and female body of man is to again deny Reality, while showing only ignorance of the law,
which generally places the male as head of household and Þrst inheritable heir. Again I ask of the
reader so afßicted by this foundational and immature fallacious perspective to grow the hell up,
and quick! The harmony found between male and female is a necessary Design of Nature and a
requirement for the continuation of Life. Harmony does not mean equality, it means not denying
what we are, and using our speciÞc gender-oriented strengths to prop up the otherÕs weaknesses.
To deny our sexual purpose, strengths, and weaknesses is to deny the undeniable Laws of Nature.
We need each other more than we may ever care to admit, for Life Itself as procreation is
impossible without respect of the meticulously opposite and perfect differences we both possess.
Wink-wink. Nudge-nudge.

To state oneÕs Þrm belief (love) in the non-existence of anything as the foundation of oneÕs actions
in and under any law is akin to organized chaos (legalized anarchy); the belief in nothingness (pure
intangible form) as a God without substance. It is to be as a ship without anchor that may never
Þnd land. This state of mind is the perfection of evil (artiÞce) and its inßuence over the minds of
men, for crimes against Nature (including those against man) can only be justiÞed against a God-
less Creation - a Creation and all Its Creatures without an actual Creator (Law-maker). From the
pledge of faith (fealty) to this legalized illusion of the governments of nations, all crimes against the
Creator regarding GodÕs Nature and Sacred Creatures are legally licensed and permissibly
committed under governmentÕs legal law. For to consider the universe as Godless allows man to
become a false god over a Creation not his own.

Remember, man is not the Creator of earth or of anything in Nature, including himself. But man
holds the power to alter the perception of Reality through the designs of his own Þctional creations
so as to suit his own unnatural desires, and yet man can seldom Þx his carnal mistakes through his
legal art forms that created them in the Þrst place. In the end, with unbounded disregard for those
Higher Laws of GodÕs Nature, Nature cannot recover from manÕs Þctional contemplation and
disrespect of Its Origin in any way that may sustain manÕs continued Existence as part of that
Creation. Nature will of course heal in Its own timelessness, but part of that healing may
necessarily involve manÕs extinction from It. Without respect of GodÕs Design of Nature, especially
by those who cannot ever mentally be tricked into believing in GodÕs re-presented false religious
images portrayed in religious art (of which said non-belief in false images is a good thing), manÕs
artiÞcial creations will ultimately destroy the gift of actual Life that allows man to artfully create
Þctional life in the Þrst place. Man must be a part of Creation and respect Its Design, including each
other, or his ability to recreate within It will necessarily end. Fiction and legalism will die with man,
the creator of those artiÞces. No doctrines of any religion are needed to acknowledge this self-
evident Reality, for corporate state-sanctioned religions only serve to cover up this knowledge as it
is written in the scriptures they pre-tend to follow and teach. Their only goal is monetary gain, and
they need voluntarily ignorant members to accomplish this corporate goal in order to remain
legally solvent as legal, artiÞcial persons (corporations). But all churches in mammon (in the legal,
monetary system) are and can only ever be morally bankrupt. A legal thing is never a spiritual
thing. Spirituality is not Òreligion,Ó yet a religious man according to law can only be a spiritually
Living and oriented man that abandons all legal, civil Þctions of the church and state, walking only
in the path laid out in those scriptural teachings. This is not a path to any Òreligion,Ó but instead a
path away from its artful organizations and incorporations. It is the path apparently walked by the
allegorical christ, which led to those false religious buildings and temples of stone only when his
goal was to violently overturn the tables of those money-changers of mammon, whom occupied
those ornate buildings and turned spiritual men away from God toward the usury of their own
created debt-money schemes. Jesus was a religious (adjective) man as described through his
actions, not part of a ÒreligionÓ (noun) for show. And yet the preachers and ministers of today seek
the same goal in their pursuit of the ÒofferingsÓ of the current paper money of that system of
legalized mammon, for the legal corporations called falsely (legally) as ÒreligionsÓ and their
enfranchised local church buildings in annual Þnancial conference (combination/conspiracy)
subsist only as legal entities; artiÞcial persons (non-proÞt and non-prophet corporations) bound up 




!215
by the legal law of man. And yet the Bible states over and over in most of Its books that man
should never respect persons, especially these corporations of which governments and religions
exist as. For to respect these Þctions is to respect manÕs law over GodÕs.

To be clear and to prove without doubt that these statements are True, we only need read the cases
of the legal courts. In the legal system of manÕs law, if religions and their individual churches were
not artiÞcial persons as legal corporations or associations they would not be able to be legally
summoned like demons (in legal persona) into the legal Þction of manÕs courts of artiÞcial law.
They would not need attorneys to re-present them. For legal and spiritual do not mix. They are
opposed to each other. A spiritual man cannot be called upon for he has no legal name or title
(person) to be called as. Likewise, a True church consists of only those Free and spiritual Lawful
men of christ standing in immunity from any legal jurisdictions. Only when one has no demon
(person) to be summoned into legal hell is one Truly Free, as hell is only for debtorÕs. A True
spiritually religious man living in and under that Highest Law has no debt or obligation except to
God and Nature, which includes a duty to all other men (Creation) under that Natural Law to
harm nothing, giving no reason or need to ever appear in the Þction of manÕs legal realm.

The law states that governments can respect nothing religious. So the fact that a religion can appear
by representative (attorney) in persona in a court of the government can only mean that religions are
legal (secular) corporations (artiÞcial persons) bound under legal law, not religiously (spiritually)
over and beyond it. They have no Higher Law to cling to because they cling to the secular gods that
incorporated (created) them. In other words, there is nothing spiritual about corporate religions, for
a spiritual thing is Higher in consideration than a Þctional thing, and no spiritual thing or man
would ever appear as something it is not; namely as something artiÞcial, as an artiÞcial (legal)
person or citizen or member thereof. Most important to comprehend here is that, in the legal
realm, spirituality is illegal. A legal thing (man in legal status of personhood) can only follow legal
law, while a spiritual thing (a man of God) may only obey that Higher, Spiritual (moral) Law. All
other law is outlawed in a legal (incorporated) system, which means that God is illegal, for God is
only the Source of spirituality not Þction.

This, again, is not merely the authorÕs opinion. This is Law! All things legal are inherently trumped
by all things Natural (spiritual). The Natural Law is as Supreme over man as is God over Nature. It
is only in manÕs choices that this Supremacy in Law is lost, as will be shown thoroughly and in
triplicate within this work. Choice (volunteerism) is the foundation of both the legal and the
Natural Law, as is written in scripture and copied over into ancient legal principles (maxims of
law). The legal contract and that binding contractual relationship, be it implied or express, is the
key that locks the spiritual door and bars manÕs ability to walk upon Its path.

To be clear, let us Þnally deÞne the term creation, with the humbling knowledge that all words are
merely a creation of man, so that we may go forward with the simple, foundational Truth of Reality
that man is not the Creator of anything in Nature. This under-standing is all that is required of the
reader for the comprehension of the underlying foundation of all law. Perception of the vulgar
form, image, and identity of said Creator is not nearly as important as identifying that It (God) is
speciÞcally not and never can be a man or Þctional creation (ofÞce) of man, so as to understand
manÕs place and inferiority within that so-called Creation and Its self-evident Law. The Creator
(God) needs no proof of Its already self-evident Existence, whereas man must prove through his
ratiÞed lies that of his subjects consent to GodÕs unnatural absence within the legal re-creation and
under his patented artiÞcial systems and jurisdictions, before pretending to be the false gods over
all GodÕs Creation and Creatures. Again, all that is required to proceed here is the
acknowledgement by the reader that man is not the Creator of the Universe nor of any part of
Nature, but instead that we are all born helplessly within it and speciÞcally without name or title.
That is all, for all other doctrinal concepts and imaginations of man about what ÒGodÓ is or is not
are irrelevant, for manÕs only True Sovereign is and should only ever be GodÕs Nature (Creator and
all Creation as Oneness). And so manÕs Law should only ever be that of his Sovereign. It is only
manÕs recognition and acceptance of the supposed legal sovereignty of the persons (artiÞcial legal
status) of other men pretending legal names and ßattering titles that allows most men to be legal

!216
slaves (subjects) in allegiance to those false sovereignties. Nature knows nor pre-tends no other
God than Its Creator, and so man as part of that Nature of Creation can know no other gods before
It, for he shall no longer be protected by GodÕs Law when he falls into such legal Þction (false
creation) under these legal gods. This is not religion, this is Law. The Bible is simply the allegorical
story of that non-historical fall; a timeless warning to all future generations of the evil (Þction) that
will always persist as legal artiÞce within the imaginations of men. For evil (lies) may never be
conquered, only consciously avoided.

Here we discover the duality of all words, the battle between Nature and its simulated art form
(Þction).

CREATION - noun - 1. The act of creating; the act of CAUSING TO EXIST; and especially,
the act of bringing this world into existence. Romans 1:20. 2. The act of making, by new
combinations of matter, invested with new forms and properties, AND OF SUBJECTING
TO DIFFERENT LAWS; the act of shaping and organizing; as the creation of man and other
animals, of plants, minerals, etc. 3. THE ACT OF INVESTING WITH A NEW
CHARACTER; AS THE CREATION OF PEERS IN ENGLAND. 4. The act of PRODUCING.
5. The things created; CREATURES; THE WORLD; THE UNIVERSE. As SUBJECTS then
the whole creation came. 6. Any part of the things created. Before the low creation swarmed
with men. 7. ANY THING PRODUCED OR CAUSED TO EXIST. A FALSE CREATION
proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain. (Webs1828)

PROCREATION - noun - [Latin procreatio.] The act of begetting; generation and production
of young. (Webs1828)

CREATOR - noun - [Latin] 1. The BEING OR PERSON that creates. Remember thy creator in
the days of thy youth. Ecclesiastes 12:1. 2. The THING that creates, PRODUCES or CAUSES.
(Webs1828)

PROCREATE - verb transitive - [Latin procreo; pro and creo, to create.] 1. To beget; to generate
and produce; to engender; used properly of ANIMALS. 2. To produce; used of plants, but
hardly allowable. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is interesting to note again that like the word Jehovah, Creation is a timeless concept, not a
historical event. Creation is happening as you read this, with each new Life form entering into Real
Existence and self-Evidence. It is the continuous causality of Existence and of Life. Thus the word
Creation is also to be realized as a verb of continuous action, as what is Jehovah and what is bound
to the Law of Jehovah, the Law and Laws of Nature. As will be discussed in greater detail, the
“Genesis” story is not the story of Creation, for Creation is timeless and endless, not a singular
historical fact. But instead, we will Þnd that the “Genesis” account is the creation of the
“gods” (plural), being men who thought themselves to be God’s replacement with designs to rule
over all worldly (artiÞcial) persons, places, and things. It was the story of the creation of names
(nouns), and therefore of property, derived from what was ambiguously self-Existent before. This
explains also the apparent discord between the New and the Old Testament, where the
foundational Law of God (of Nature) is to replace the Old “Mosaic” law of men (false, magistrate
gods).

The scriptures certainly speak of man’s own creation of Þction and artiÞcial things, stating clearly
that the wrath of God happens only when man goes against his own Nature and the Law of his
own place and Existence in Nature, breaking Nature’s Law and thus his own best interests. The
wrath of Jehovah (as the harmonizing, balancing Force of Nature’s True Design) comes only to men
who believe in (love) lies. It’s so simple. For a lie is only ever temporary. And yet this big lie of
legality is our modernly accepted and consented to life-style, our simulated reality, as an existence

!217
steeped in a legal matrix of lies. The Truth (God) is not inherently unknown to any man. Only the
artiÞce can cause such a spiritual death in conscious awareness, and then only through the
promises of wealth in mammon.

—=—

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and
unrighteousness of men, WHO HOLD THE TRUTH IN UNRIGHTEOUSNESS;
Because that which may be known of God IS MANIFEST IN THEM; for God hath
shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world
ARE CLEARLY SEEN, BEING UNDERSTOOD BY THE THINGS THAT ARE MADE,
even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that,
WHEN THEY KNEW GOD, THEY GLORIFIED HIM NOT AS GOD, NEITHER
WERE THANKFUL; BUT BECAME VAIN IN THEIR IMAGINATIONS, and their
foolish heart was darkened. PROFESSING THEMSELVES TO BE WISE, THEY
BECAME FOOLS, AND CHANGED THE GLORY OF THE UNCORRUPTIBLE GOD
INTO AN IMAGE MADE LIKE TO CORRUPTIBLE MAN, and to birds, and
fourfooted beasts, and creeping thingsÉ WHO CHANGED THE TRUTH OF GOD
INTO A LIE, AND WORSHIPPED AND SERVED THE CREATURE MORE THAN
THE CREATOR, who is blessed FOR EVERÉ And even as they did not like to retain
God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those
THINGS WHICH ARE NOT CONVENIENTÉÓ

—Romans 1: 18-23 and 25, 28 KJB

—=—

It is very easy to worship Creation without Its Creator, inseparable as they are, for the Creation is
generally seen while the Oneness and Conscious Being of Creation as a Whole remains unseen. But
ease is of course a sin. What is easy is very seldom the spiritually correct path. To worship Jesus
alone, for instance, as worshiping the ÒCreature (that which is/was created) more than the CreatorÓ
is to worship the temporary (secular, worldly) aspect of God in the limited form of man without the
eternal, Permanent and Timeless Being (verb) that is Its Master (Source), of that in which all things
ßow and return to. In other words, to worship that which came into Existence after Existence was
already in Existence is to worship Creation without a Creator. It is to worship what is temporary, as
the cycle of a single Life and death. But how can we worship a Creator while completely destroying
and polluting Its Creation? This is unreasonable. And so like children who misbehave on the
playground when they think they are not being watched, so too does man present his carnal hu-
man side when he disrespects GodÕs Nature (Creation). If no God in any anthropomorphized form
is actually watching, which is neither provable nor improvable, we must still consider the very
good reason behind accepting this idea of Òa watcherÓ or Creator as our very foundation of Law.
For the Law must also have a Creator, and this stands as a provable, legal fact in all secular systems
of religion and government. For remember that one's law (creation) deÞnes oneÕs god (creator). The
inseparability of God and Nature, of Creator and Creation, and of Lawmaker and Law is a fruitless
engagement of thought that serves no purpose and reaches no end or foundation.

Law enforcement ofÞcers, for instance, be it the police under the Sheriff, the military, private
security, or some other masonic sect thereof, are not there to stop crime but to vainly attempt to
prevent it from happening. It is the ÒvisibilityÓ factor that prevents crimes, even those as meager as
speeding, just by the conscious awareness that a police ofÞcer is potentially watching and ready to
legally extort us through literal highway robbery. Unfortunately, this is not a spiritual awareness
that is invoked, merely a fear of exaction (Þne) or other punishment. The point is that the presence
of an authority Þgure is shown to obviously prevent crime.

!218
Is it not reasonable then to consider the Highest of all Authorities as our watcher at all times as an
inducement to follow the Law that would keep us Free in Nature and out of that legal matrix? Is
this not the utopian prison model of the garden of Eden we spoke about earlier? Does being
trapped in paradise, in heaven on Earth really sound so bad?

Would you, for instance, watch a porno if you knew your mother was watching? What about her
judging gaze is it that would stop you from acting with such vulgarity when she is not around?
And what moral compunction causes us to at least pretend our best behavior when she is around?
The real question is, why does that compunction diminish when she leaves the room? Why do we
not strive to achieve our highest spiritual Being and Law at all times, even when we know we are
alone? I believe the answer to this question is a stark lack of spiritual awareness and purpose. The
lesson here is not that your mother is God, but that ALL of Creation is God. And so what we do to
It, to every single part of It no matter how small, is what we do to God. Thus, as with the theory of
karma, we aren’t just abusing God’s Nature but ourselves as part of it. Thus, as Jehovah is ever-
present and is deÞned as such, so God (our spiritual “Father”) is metaphorically always watching.
Perhaps watching is not as good a description as that which is continuously suffering our evils
against it. Nature (Jehovah) is always suffering our trespass upon It with every action we take and
with every crime against It we don’t actively prevent. We cannot therefore interact with Nature, in
our nurturing from It, and in the deÞling or destroying of It, without doing so to God Its-Self.

And this is where religion comes into the picture. Not so much to prevent such crimes against
Nature but to give false hope and secular forgiveness for those crimes, both in their doing and in
their allowance. Silence is consent, after all. The organized religion model legally permits
incorporated men (artiÞcial persons) to attempt to organize such spiritual concepts into enforceable
laws. Yet through the democracy model, every attempt at enforcing the unenforceable moral Law
of God fails, as the anarchy of licensure and sovereignty (lawlessness) is artiÞcially bestowed upon
corrupted men in their persons and ßattering titles. Power corrupts absolutely and without
exception. Of course all religions are born in corruption, for all religions carry their own doctrines
of supposedly sovereign, immune, and even “infallible” men. Fortunately for us, the Law of Nature
is absolutely incorruptible, Existing alone and unblemished from all others in Its self-Existence.
What is self-evident cannot be turned into a lie, though words of art are certainly given false
authority over that which they represent as the names of Þctional persons, places, and things. The
Matrix, all that is illusionary and false, is created and exists solely as coded words and nothing else.
But the Law of God, the Law of Nature Itself, forbids any such Þctions. It respects no words of men
just as it respects no other gods of men. It is through this foundation of Law that Jehovah (verb)
Truly is our Father and Mother, for unless we deviate from that Plan (Law), from the very Design of
All Life and self-Existence, then nothing can harm us. But this path, the path of christ, is an ever-
present and conscious one. There are no super-natural (above Nature) angels or saints guiding our
way, for these are the only the re-creations of the religions of men. There are no street signs warning
us of impending doom from Þction. There are only devils (attorneys/agents) at every turn,
continuously trying to induce us all into contract with mammon, always trying to despoil our own
place in the Garden with the useless knowledge and valuations of the legal tree. For Heaven, you
see, is voluntary. Those who attain it in Life must Þght at every step to keep it, and it may only be
kept by those who bind themselves under the Highest Law. For there is no room for the spiritually
dead in Heaven. No persons allowed…

And so to deny the Creator of the Highest Law of Nature as Jehovah in non-belief (without Love) is
actually one of the stupidest things man can possibly do, for he immediately defeats himself
without trial (he judges/dooms/believes himself not to Exist as part of Jehovah/Creation/Nature).
Thus man’s law may without hindrance be applied to man as his subscription by force simply
because he has and more speciÞcally allows no other option. He denies his own Nature. More to the
point, this also allows for any man or beast or rock to be called as “god” (noun/name/title) despite
its actual being (verb), as only a minor part of Creation, not the Creator. In other words, if all parts
of Nature are considered as Truly Equal; that a diamond is no more important or valuable than a
sliver of wood irritating your skin, then no superior force or god form may ever emerge in chaos.

!219
For if all of Nature is the complete Oneness of God, then all things within Nature should be treated
as a part (property) of God and Its alone.

Essentially, by denying this Permanent State of Being of all things as the monotheistic substance of
God, man will thus suffer some other form or image as a stand-in god (anti-christ), be it of human,
animal, computer system, or other respected extract of the imaginations and language arts of men.
And so to consider the question of what is God, as Jehovah, is to consider a timeless, spiritual
domain that cannot be confused with the singular events and births and deaths within the time
domain. God is not born, but is the origin and permanent and continuing eternal Existence of Life
Itself. One is of the evidential, visible world and one is of unfathomable, invisible Eternity. God is
the blood that ßows and passes to all Life in continuous and perpetual motion. God is the un-
deniable past, present, and future, which is such a vast concept that we can never actually know
God in this Realm. No man can explain or deÞne God simply because God Is what Is at this
moment and what Is going to Be in the next, ad inÞnity. The importance of this hierarchy cannot be
understated, for we must always remember that foundational maxim of law, which says: the creator
controls. To attribute any law over that of Creation (Nature) we must acknowledge a Source that is
Higher than our own imaginations. To consider Creation as some act of randomness is insane,
anarchical, and the man doing so will have his just reward, a random grouping of insane men
acting as the creators of organized chaos as magistrate gods of the united nations over him. This is
our individual course passed on through the choices we make (or choose not to make in silence).
And in consideration of that Source, we must consider It as Master and ourselves as happy and
contented slaves under Its Naturally established Law and abundance. Be it the false existence of
legal titles or the spiritual and self-evident Existence that Is Jehovah that we choose, we will be
subject to that opposing god’s law despite our limited beliefs. We must follow the Law of God to
defeat the law of man or we must follow the law of artiÞce (of men) to defeat the Law and Laws of
Nature. This is and has always been the choice. And since these devils entered into the priest class
and created these false ÒChristianÓ religions, that choice has been concealed not only from our
knowledge, but from all of our God-given senses. For each of our bodies are the temple of God, and
our minds, our bodies, and thus our souls have been corrupted in countless ways. And so we have
been tricked to listen without hearing and looking without seeing.

Yet upon this Natural Law path we may not only understand but also agree with each other
universally and without question as to what the Highest Law Is, Was, and always Shall Be. For it is
literally the Life factor in our blood. It is each of our individual foundations of Life. And he who
seeks to bypass that Law may instantly be known as an agent of that which is adversarial (satanic)
to man and Nature.

I wish to exclaim here a deep regret for my inability to put into words that which Is God. No
apology is offered, only the True humility of such an inconceivable potentiality. This knowledge is
deeper than mere words may proscribe, and so the religious notion of having a “personal
relationship with Jesus christÓ comes to mind here. This overused and meaningless term is put
forward incessantly by corporately brainwashed ÒChristiansÓ without under-standing of its
meaning, again thanks to the language barrier we are about to uncover. You see, a personal
relation-ship with Jesus christ is not merely some ritualistic acknowledgement of christÕs Existence,
but the actual personiÞcation of christ in all of our own actions conÞrmed under the Law of Nature.
Acting christ-like (Lawful) is the True and only Lawful meaning here. This is important, as we will
read, for the pope (corporate ofÞce of ÒChristÓ) of the Catholic (universal) Roman (pagan)
ÒChristianÓ Church is deadly opposed to this ÒpersonalÓ worship of christ and Jehovah, seeking to
keep all men under its own cannons and the bull of that infallible false pope-god. (Covered in
Volume II.)

But can we call the pope and its church as the actual word antichrist?

Again, we arrive at voluntary choice. We believe (love) either christ or that which is opposed to or
in place of christ. We love the Law of God or that legal law and doctrinal cannon which is opposed

!220
to It. We are either acting like christ or we are not, and so we are either acting by the force and
compulsion of our moral beliefs (love) of Law or we are not. There is no middle ground here.

Again, we must know what the word means from its intent and source to answer this oh so
important question:

—=—

Antichristos (ἀντίχριστος)

Strong’s G500:

“The name of antichristos was formed perhaps by John, the only writer
in the New Testament who uses it [Þve times]; he employs it of THE
CORRUPT POWER AND INFLUENCE HOSTILE TO CHRISTIAN
INTERESTS, ESPECIALLY THAT WHICH IS AT WORK IN FALSE
TEACHERS WHO HAVE COME FROM THE BOSOM OF THE
CHURCH AND ARE ENGAGED IN DISSEMINATING ERROR: 1 John
2:18 (where the meaning is, Ôwhat ye have heard concerning Antichrist,
as about to make his appearance just before the return of Christ, IS
NOW FULFILLED IN THE MANY FALSE TEACHERS, MOST
WORTHY TO BE CALLED ANTICHRISTSÕ); 1 John 4:3 (and of the false
teachers themselves) 1 John 2:22, 2 John 7…”
Strong’s Concordance #G500, from Thayer’s Greek Lexicon entry for “antíchristos,” from G473 and G5547; an opponent of the Messiah:—antichrist.

—=—

“Catholicism is Mithraism. Mithraism was the religion of Persia, it was

the religion of Rome, and it is the religion of the Roman Catholic
Church. There are seven grades in Mithraism. The highest grade is
called Father.”
—Walter Veith, from his Revelation Seminar and lecture entitled ‘Total Onslaught’

—=—

Encyclopedia Britannica explains:

Mithraism, the worship of Mithra, the Iranian god of the sun, justice, contract, and war in pre-
Zoroastrian Iran. Known as Mithras in the Roman Empire during the 2nd and 3rd centuries ce,
this deity was honoured as the patron of loyalty to the emperor. After the acceptance of
Christianity by the emperor Constantine in the early 4th century, Mithraism rapidly
declined.

Before ancient religious reformer Zarathustra (Greek name Zoroaster) gained inßuence in the
region during the 6th century bce, the Iranians had a polytheistic religion, and Mithra was
the most important of their gods. First of all, HE WAS THE GOD OF CONTRACT AND
MUTUAL OBLIGATION. In a cuneiform tablet of the 15th century bce that contains a treaty

!221
 between the Hittites and the Mitanni, Mithra is invoked as THE GOD OF OATH. Further-
more, in some Indian Vedic texts the god Mitra (the Indian form of Mithra) appears both as
“friend” and as “contract.” The word mitra may be translated in either way, because contracts
and mutual obligation make friends. In short, Mithra may signify any kind of interpersonal
communication and whatever establishes good relations between people. Mithra was called
the Mediator. Mithra was also the god of the sun, of the shining light that beholds every-
thing, and, hence, WAS INVOKED IN OATHS. The Greeks and Romans considered Mithra
as a sun god. HE WAS PROBABLY ALSO THE GOD OF KINGS. He was the god of mutual
obligation between the king and his warriors and, hence, the god of war. He was also THE
GOD OF JUSTICE, WHICH WAS GUARANTEED BY THE KING. Whenever people
observed justice and contract, they venerated Mithra…

Roman Mithraism, like Iranian Mithraism, WAS A RELIGION OF LOYALTY TOWARD THE
KING. It seems to have been encouraged by the emperors, especially Commodus (180–192),
Septimius Severus (193–211), and Caracalla (211–217). Most adherents of Mithra known to us
from inscriptions are soldiers of both low and high rank, ofÞcials in the service of the
emperor, imperial slaves, and freedmen (who quite often were very inßuential people)Ñ
PERSONS WHO PROBABLY KNEW WHICH GOD WOULD LEAD THEM TO QUICK
PROMOTION…

Within a few generations, the Roman world had completely assimilated the Persian god.
When Diocletian attempted a renewal of the Roman state and religion, he did not forget
Mithra. In 307 ce, in a dedication from Carnuntum (at the Danube, near Vienna), Diocletian
and his colleagues dedicated an altar to Mithra as the patron of their empire (fautori imperii
sui).

But in 312 Constantine won the battle at the Milvian Bridge under the sign of the cross.
Instantaneously, the dedications to Mithra ceased, even though there was no immediate
public interdiction of Mithraic ceremonies. The worship seems to have collapsed quite
suddenly when imperial favour ceased to be with the Mithraists. Dedications to Mithra
appear again between about 357 and 387, but only at Rome. THE DEDICATORS ALL
COME FROM THE OLD PAGAN ARISTOCRACY OF THE CITY OF ROME, WHICH IN
THIS PERIOD WAS IN OPEN OPPOSITION TO THE NEW CHRISTIAN EMPEROR AT
CONSTANTINOPLE. In these inscriptions, however, Mithra is only one of many traditional
pagan gods. The Mithraic mysteries had gradually faded long before. And when the Roman
opposition was defeated, pagan worship was suppressed altogether.

THE CREATION OF THE WORLD IS THE CENTRAL EPISODE OF MITHRAIC

MYTHOLOGY. According to the myths, the sun god sent his messenger, the raven, to Mithra
and ordered him to sacriÞce the bull. Mithra executed the order reluctantly; in many reliefs he
is seen turning aside his face in sorrow. But at the very moment of the death of the bull, a great
miracle happened. The white bull was metamorphosed into the moon; the cloak of Mithra was
transformed into the vault of the sky, with the shining planets and Þxed stars; from the tail of
the bull and from his blood sprang the Þrst ears of grain and the grape; and from the
genitals of the animal ran the holy seed which was received by a mixing bowl. EVERY
CREATURE ON EARTH WAS SHAPED WITH AN ADMIXTURE OF THE HOLY SEED.
One Mithraic hymn begins: ‘THOU HAST REDEEMED US TOO BY SHEDDING THE
ETERNAL BLOOD.’…”

—‘Mithraism’ entry, under ‘Persian Religion,’ written by: Reinhold Merkelbach, taken from Encyclopedia Brittanica Online

Ñ=Ñ

It is easy to hide such pagan traditions behind organized Christianity (crime) when they are so
similar to the Bible story. But those that have uncovered such similitudes unfortunately confuse the
Bible with the rogue religion (both church and state) called Roman Catholicism. They are not at all

!222
the same, only similar. One is the Word, the Natural Law, and one is a corporate governmental
system of man’s law based on contract, which the Bible is against. And so the hate of the religious
matrix built around these ancient pagan deities is sadly confused to be the same as the Law (Word)
of God. The pagan idols and sun god is confused as the Son (Word) of God (Jehovah). The noun is
mistakenly confused with the intention of the verb. The Being of Nature, of Reality and its Law are
confused with artiÞcial being and title in a legalistic contractual relationship. And justice (positive
law) is mistaken as an Act of God (negative, self-evident Law), when it is merely an act of men in
their own entitled ßattery.

When we take the scriptures as intended, in Þgurative and parabolic verse, then we may certainly
see how this word antichrist applies not only to the pope and other “heads” of corporations calling
themselves as religions and governments, but also to each of ourselves in our every day actions
and educative process. It is not such a mysterious word, and it certainly is not as the church teaches
in its obfuscation of christÕs reason. And so this author believes that Þrst and foremost we must
admit defeat physically, mentally, and spiritually before we may move past this legal matrix of the
combined church and state, for our defeat lies in our own actions that stand opposed to christ’s
teachings. Our actions are as the manifestation of the antichristos in each of us, for our actions are
guided by false gods and their laws. We are afßicted deeply and darkly by entertainment that is
purely antichristos. We submit our children to a public school system that rejects the Bible, and so
can only be called as antichristos as it teaches strictly of worldly things. This is what it is to Live in
sin, to live in spiritual death under the artiÞce of civil, legal means and laws. We are, each of us, on
an obviously antichristos (un-Lawful) path, and our legal id-entity proves this Truth without
question.

And so it boils down to this… Whatever we believe in (love) and pay tribute (tax) to will be what
we will receive. It is important to grasp the fact that taxation is the simulation of slave-labor, that
we pay a tax instead of working directly. But for all intents and purposes that money is blood
money, a tribute that pays for nothing but the extorted privilege of franchise (freedom) within the
open-air public prison of the district. Heaven or hell on earth, it is our choice; Creator of men or
creator of persons; God or satan (anti-God); Nature or that which is opposed to It. This is to say
that one’s belief in the non-Existence of God (atheism) and thus of the Creator of the Highest Law
is equal to our belief (love) in satan and the satanic, antichristos system that has built up around us.
One cannot exist without the other, for a purposeful non-belief in God is as well a non-purposeful
belief in non-God. The point here is that these gods, both True and false, will always be in existence
at the same time, and so a conscious, moral choice as well must be consciously made at all times.
Choice is not merely an event, but a never-ceasing Lifestyle. Choice is a continuous battle over the
temptations of the mind, body, and soul towards sin (artiÞce). This is the only True Religion, which
is only the religious (verb) following of the Law. A choice without consideration and adherence to
the Highest moral Law is merely the causality of the illusion of false choices in legal artiÞce. Voting
is not choice, for voting is always a yes. Choice must contain an option to say no. When the
democracy model is in place, the majority mob wins, and so every vote is a yes vote, for some
candidate will be elected. A voter simply cannot vote no, for a vote is merely an action of consent
to the corruption that is democracy and legal government. Free men never vote, they choose.

Choice is not a once in a lifetime event, but is a commitment to something at all turns of Life and in
every decision we make. Choice is eternal, not temporary. And choice certainly is not a legal-
friendly concept under strict written law. Not surprisingly, the word choice is yet another word
that is strikingly absent from the legal dictionaries! It is missing from Black’s 1st, 2nd, and 4th
Editions, as well as from Mr. Anderson’s 1889 Dictionary of Law. Of course this is easily
understood, for once a man agrees to act in the person (property) of another, the man has already
made his choice, and so there is no need to deÞne such a word in law. There is no choice in law, for
the legal law is strictly applied to all registered persons, places, and things (property) without any
possibility to choose another. Citizen-ship is of course a post-choice, an after effect of choice. The
exception I did Þnd, of course, was an extremely limited deÞnition of choice, and we Þnd it here
only because this dictionary has to do with deÞning strictly the terms and consequences of the US
constitution.

!223
 CHOICE - Preference either OF A PERSON OR THING, TO ONE OF SEVERAL OTHER
PERSONS OR THINGS. ELECTION. (Bouv1856)

—=—

As I mentioned above, ‘voting’ is not an act of choice. In synonym, the word vote is likened to a
prayer to some god, and is an act of the lower-class. A voter cannot vote no, only yes to one of two or
more appointed candidates. Only the elect may make a choice, which is why the president of the
United States is elected by the Electoral College, not the general public as a popular vote of
common “voters.” Voting and electing are as different as night and day. Only slaves vote (pray), for
a slave has no choice. His initial choice was already to become a slave to the will of the elect. Only
those with the power of choice, the elect, may actually make a choice through their election. To be
clear, the synonyms for the word elect are elite, chosen, and upper-class.

This is why the Bible in multiple verses tells us that we, individually, must make each of our
elections sure. Our election (not our vote, not our “religion”) must be of Jehovah, of christ, and thus
of the Highest Law, not the legal Þctions and gods of men. One is either sure by his election, or one
becomes the surety for another property (persona), thereby loosing the ability to elect (choose).
Masters elect, subjects vote. One either retains his God-given right to Free Will and thus constant
choice or one sells that right legally to obtain artiÞcial (legal) beneÞts from church and state in its
false persona and under the strict, Roman law of the nations.

What we will Þnd, however, are the words opposite or antonym to choice, namely causality,
compulsion, necessity, and especially inferiority. And to have the possession of choice is certainly the
opposite of operating in agency (employment) under a principal master.

CAUSA - Latin. That which operates to produce an effect that on account of which thing is
done; that which supplies a motive, or constitutes a reason. (WCA1889)

CAUSE - English. (1) That which produces or effects a result; that from which anything
proceeds, and WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD NOT EXIST… The law concerns itself only
with THE DIRECT CAUSE OF AN EVENT — that force or inßuence which, in the order of
CAUSATION, is nearest to the effect or result under consideration, and is sufÞcient of itself
to produce the result. (WCA1889)

INFER - To bring a result or conclusion from something back of it, that is, FROM SOME
EVIDENCE OR DATA FROM WHICH IT MAY LOGICALLY BE DEDUCED. To "presume"
is to take or assume a matter beforehand, without proof — to take for granted. (WCA1889)

INFERIOR - 1. THE LOWER OF TWO GRADES OF AUTHORITY OR JURISDICTION;

SUBORDINATE: as, an inferior court or tribunal, an inferior ofÞcer. Opposed (to) superior.
See Court; OfÞcer. 2. OF LESS WORTH OR IMPORTANCE; THE LESS SIGNIFICANT: as,
when it is said that TERMS OF A LOWER CLASS CANNOT BE EXTENDED BY
CONSTRUCTION TO INCLUDE TERMS OR MEMBERS OF A HIGHER CLASS. Thus, the
term "animals," meaning quadrupeds, will not be held to include "birds." See General;
Superior. (WCA1889)

—=—

The source of the strawman, as the legal creation of the legal person, is the birth certiÞcate. Its
artiÞcial (legal) life is evidenced by that documentation and ofÞcially sealed certiÞcation of a legal
(Þctional) event, namely the ÒissueÓ of a ÒchildÓ (as legal terms of art/Þctional entities). The court
presumes the person (property) will follow the legal system of law (i.e., social contract) that it was
created from, and that the man in surety for that person will appear in inferior form when
summoned, either in persona or as agent (attorney). Once the appearance is made known to the
court, meaning that the man id-entiÞes himself as the strawman person or its agent, the

!224
presumption turns into an inference. In other words, the inferior or superior class of that legal
persona is evidenced by the appearance.

And all of this is the result not of choice but of causality, for at no point may the man lawfully
refuse participation in these things while bound in surety and thus compulsion to that strawman
and its legal law. And so the maxims of law establish that without a person in a place doing or using
some thing (proprietary legal names/nouns), no cause can be inferred (proven) to exist. It is not
enough that an untainted man did any action, he must be proven to have done it with the intention
of acting in person (property), and that action must be proven to have taken place in a legal juris-
diction recognized by that court. And Þnally, whatever object or thing is in dispute (i.e., subject
matter) must be of a legal nature and name (not Real). Of course, all of these props are of a Þctional
character. They are, in other words, not of God's Realm of Nature. They are simply not Real,
existing only by the induced trickery and word-magic that leads to the be-lief (love) of lies. We must
recognize that intent is extremely connected to choice, and that the purpose of tricking men into
legal personhood and citizenship is speciÞcally to take away choice and thus destroy the capacity
for intention. For the person (property) has one purpose, to support the principal corporation it
was birthed from under oath. The employee/agent operates exclusively under the law of its
creator, having no need or use for intent or choice. Remember that evidence of one's use of a legal
person-hood is proof of intent to abandon Jehovah and the Natural Law, and speciÞcally the
abandonment of any unalienable (Natural) rights attributed to being as God-given.

And remember, this legal freedom is called franchise, as is the ability to vote (the voting franchise).
This is not Real freedom, any more than one who is plugged into The Matrix is actually, Naturally
Free under God. Citizenship or participation in The Matrix, or in this current expression of the legal
simulation of Reality under the law of nations, is a franchise, not True Freedom. A simulation is
never the same as the Real. But we must also be honest with ourselves and admit that we are slaves
to this system of lies and illusion before we can reach for the exit (Exodus).

This current matrix of legal hell is only a manifestation of our own doing, representing that which
we are falsely made to believe in (love) and respect over that of the Nature of Reality. We may only
know and worship God through our own actions under Its Law, just as we may only know satan
(that which is opposed to Reality) through our own actions. Both of these involve a sense of
personiÞcation, one of the Real and one of the artiÞce. We either act the part or we suffer the
consequences, for to not act at all is to stand silently and in shame at satan’s side.

—=—

“If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.”
—Rush, lyrics from the song ‘Free Will’

—=—

Still think this is just the foolish ramblings of religion?

Wake up! This is the True story of your Life!

After many years in the research chair, I have found that when a word cannot be discovered in the
legal dictionaries as a strictly adjudicated and deÞned term of that legal art, then generally the
nature of that word is very likely of an extreme importance to dissect and comprehend, for it is
often then only a consequence of the Source of Natural causes. We Þnd such a conundrum with the
word prediction. While this word is accessible in more general works like Webster’s Dictionary of
the English Language, it cannot be found in Black’s 1st-4th editions, Bouvier’s 1856, or Anderson’s
1889 dictionaries of law. And so we must take into consideration why this is so, how such a
spiritual and even rudimentary and foundational scientiÞc concept as ÒpredictabilityÓ does not
exist in the organized chaos of the legal realm? Therein we may reafÞrm that the Law of Nature, or

!225
that which we call as God's Word, contains nor has need or dependence upon any of the language
arts and words created by men. God’s Word, again, contains no words. The Word is the Natural
Law. It is pre-diction. The self-Existence of the Law of Nature is pre- (before) diction (the words) of
man. Nature came Þrst, and thus so too did Its binding Law and Laws. And so the Law of Nature is
also, in fact and without question, pre-man.

The seasons are predictable, and that foresight leads man to abundance in the garden. The night
and day are predictable, and man's sleeping habits follow that predictable aspect of Nature. The
procession of the stars are predictable. The rains in monsoon are predictable as are the snowpacks
of the winter. And the actions and reactions, habits and habitats of most Life upon this earth are as
well predictable (common). This is the so-called self-Existent Design, the plan of Nature’s God.

But in the midst of all of this predictable behavior of the Natural Order, there lies the contra-diction
that is man…

Man in his bare essence (pre-diction) is also an extremely predictable part of Creation, that is, when
the power of lies and artiÞce arenÕt causing contradicting stumbling blocks over his Natural state of
Being. Under the Law of Nature and no other, when the negative aspect and duty of Law is applied
and consciously followed, and when inversely mammon (artiÞcial monetary value) is nowhere to
be found in man’s spiritual, moral consideration of all things, the result may only be the predict-
ability of every other similarly regenerated man. No man would need fear another, for each man's
intention must by Law be steeped in Love, Charity, and with the goal to enrich all others but one-
self. And man therefor would hold only the Purest of defensive stances to protect this abundant
way of Living. Amongst the predictable, there are no strangers. There is no need to establish names
and reputations (legal persons), for there is no need of them when the Highest Law is followed.
There need not be written any contract or new law, and no judge is needed to declare what is al-
ready the self-evidence and self-existence of what is the True and only Law. And no matter where I
may travel, I may expect the same perfection of Law and Equity there. I need not fear thieves, for
no sane man would steal what is charitably already his own if he would just ask.

The point is that Jehovah is predictable, and “Jehovah is salvation.” Man is in fact the only Creature
that may behave unnaturally, for man is the only Creature that has the capacity to deny his own
place and Source in Nature. Thus man is the only part of Creation that believes he may create laws
outside of his own Nature. And with each unnatural law he makes, the more unpredictable he be-
comes. For the only purpose of those laws are to pretend an escape from the inescapable Laws of
God, each an attempt to make harmonious what are the inharmonious actions he takes against his
own Nature and place within It. Competition absolutely breeds unpredictably.

Not ironically, this is the very reason that those in power and wealth wish to cause the common
man to perceive Nature Itself, despite Its self-Existence, as chaotic and thus without a set Law or
Design. For nothing could possibly be more appealing to those corrupting, adversarial elements of
this Reality than to trick us into legally allowing It to be corporately blemished and squandered
through irresponsible, artiÞcial personhood and licensure (organized anarchy), its Life-blood and
Source covered-up by dystopian inventions and polluted beyond measure. We cannot ever forget
that what is legal is that which is opposed to Nature. Another word for this is contra, as in contra-
diction, meaning against GodÕs Word and even the words of men. Any legal idea will always be
contradictory to GodÕs Will, for it can serve no other purpose as false doctrine. And any spiritual
idea will be contradictory to the state’s goals.

PRE - An English preÞx, is the Latin proe, BEFORE, probably a contracted word. (Webs1828)

DICTION - noun - [Latin, TO SPEAK.] EXPRESSION OF IDEAS BY WORDS; STYLE;

manner of expression. (Webs1828)

!226
 PREDICTION - noun - [Latin proedictio.] A FORETELLING; A PREVIOUS DECLARATION
OF A FUTURE EVENT; PROPHECY. The fulÞllment of the predictions of the prophets is
considered to be a strong argument in favor of the divine origin of the Scriptures. (Webs1828)

CONTRA - A Latin preposition signifying AGAINST, IN OPPOSITION, entering into the

composition of some English words. It appears to be a compound of CON and tra, like intra;
tra for W. tras. Fr. contre. (Webs1828)

CONTRADICTION - noun - [Latin] 1. An assertion of the contrary to what has been said or
afÞrmed; DENIAL; contrary declaration. 2. OPPOSITION, whether by words, reproaches or
attempts to defeat. Consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself.
Hebrews 12:3. 3. Direct opposition or repugnancy; INCONSISTENCY WITH ITSELF;
incongruity or contrariety of things, words, thoughts or propositions. These theorems
involve a contradiction. IF WE PERCEIVE TRUTH, WE THEREBY PERCEIVE WHATEVER
IS FALSE IN CONTRADICTION TO IT. (Webs1828)

CONTRADICT - In practice. TO DISPROVE. TO PROVE A FACT CONTRARY TO WHAT

HAS BEEN ASSERTED BY A WITNESS. (Black4)

CONTRADICTION IN TERMS - A phrase of which the parts are expressly inconsistent, as

e.g. "an innocent murder;" "a fee-simple for life." (Black4)

CONTRADICTION - The incompatibility, contrariety, and evident opposition of two ideas,

which are the subject of one and the same proposition. 2. In general, when a party accused
of a crime contradicts himself, it is presumed he does so because he is guilty FOR TRUTH
DOES NOT CONTRADICT ITSELF, AND IS ALWAYS CONSISTENT, WHEREAS
FALSEHOOD IS IN GENERAL INCONSISTENT AND THE TRUTH OF SOME KNOWN
FACTS WILL CONTRADICT THE FALSEHOOD OF THOSE WHICH ARE FALSELY
ALLEGED TO BE TRUE. But there must still be much caution used by the judge, as there may
be sometimes apparent contradictions which arise either from the timidity, the ignorance, or
the inability of the party to explain himself, when in fact he tells the truth. 3. When a
witness contradicts himself as to something which is important in the case, his testimony will
be much weakened, or it may be entirely discredited and when he relates a story of facts which
he alleges passed only in his presence, and he is contradicted as to other facts which are known
to others, his credit will be much impaired. 4. When two witnesses, or other persons, state
things directly opposed to each other, it is the duty of the judge or jury to reconcile these
apparent contradictions; but when this cannot be done, the more improbable statement must
be rejected; or, if both are entitled to the same credit, then the matter is as if no proof had
been given. See Circumstances. (Bouv1856)

CONTRA BONOS MORES - Against good morals. CONTRACTS CONTRA BONOS

MORES ARE VOID. (Black4)

—=—

It is quite simple. Scripture is pre-diction. Legal law is contra-diction.

Here we can see another example of a negative cancelling out a positive declaration, when both
witnesses offering ÒproofÓ are in perfect contradiction to each other. The positive cannot exist with
any authority next to or over its equal negative. And so we may take comfort that lies may always
be defeated by Truth, but only if we are diligent in our rooting up of and non-respect of those lies.
The Truth is never that which is improbable, for Truth is self-evident, needing no scientiÞc
probability chart to determine Its self-Existence as what is Real and True. Evil may never triumph
over Good, for evil (artiÞce) cannot exist without Good (Reality), just as death is impossible without
Life. The body (vessel) is a mere golem without the mind, just as the soul is unseen without that
vessel to manifest its will. Lies exist only where Truth is being covered up, and without Truth, with-

!227
out Nature, and speciÞcally without Living men, there can be no standing lies. The last breath of
the last man will carry with it the extinction of the last lie.

This is the eternal battle of the elect (elite), for evil must tolerate what is Good lest evil cease to exist.
The upper-class must use and depend upon the lower-class to exist. The wealthy must supply the
doom of welfare substance to the poor they feed upon to keep their status of wealth. And the
private landholders under Crown and country must keep pretending to own all the land so that the
public multitude of non-landholders are forced by causality of law and property (person-hood) to
continue to trespass upon the land wherever they may step, paying fees and tribute as their legal
forgiveness. This is what we call legal freedom, which they call a franchise.

Scripture parabolically predicts what will happen when men contradict GodÕs Word (Law/Son).
And this is called as prophesy, not by the measure of some Roman calendar dates, but by the mea-
sure of man's ignorance of the unwritten Word of God. This prophesy is merely the self-evident
result of man's turning away from the Law of Nature. And the Bible need not be pretended to be
anything but this.

And so we Þnd here through this notion of man's harmony with Nature and Its Law the origin of
intent of what we call as the common law. Remembering that the Bible is the foundation of
common law, we may easily turn to scripture to verify how under the Law of God and Nature men
may live in common Harmony without legal, amoral stumbling blocks. In a perfected society under
God, this is how man would Live and treat all other men. This is the perfection of men following
the christ example.

—=—

“And all that believed (loved) WERE TOGETHER, AND HAD ALL
THINGS COMMON; And sold their possessions and goods, AND
PARTED THEM TO ALL MEN, AS EVERY MAN HAD NEED. And
they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking
bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and
singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the
people. And the Lord added to the church (people) daily such as should
be saved.”
—Acts 2: 43-47, KJB

—=—

“And the multitude of THEM THAT BELIEVED WERE OF ONE

HEART AND OF ONE SOUL: NEITHER SAID ANY OF THEM THAT
OUGHT OF THE THINGS WHICH HE POSSESSED WAS HIS OWN;
BUT THEY HAD ALL THINGS COMMON. And with great power gave
the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great
grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that
lacked: FOR AS MANY AS WERE POSSESSORS OF LANDS OR
HOUSES SOLD THEM, AND BROUGHT THE PRICES OF THE 




!228
THINGS THAT WERE SOLD, And laid them down at the apostles' feet:
AND DISTRIBUTION WAS MADE UNTO EVERY MAN
ACCORDING AS HE HAD NEED.”
—Acts 4: 32-35, KJB

—=—

One mustn’t confuse this Charitable and Loving scriptural teaching with the legal, organized
criminal notion of “wealth redistribution.” Governments rob from the poor to feed the rich, and
then tax the rich on their earnings raped from the poor to feed the poor. Welfare is not common law,
it is the design of devils to ensure a class division. Welfare contributes nothing to the common of all
men, instead delivering the barely sustaining sustenance of abject, competitive poverty. This is a
legal, corporate welfare (noun) in mammon, not an act of a son of God towards his equals that
ensures all other men are wealthy before one’s Self.

The point here is to understand the spiritual Nature of why the Bible is the foundation of the
common law of so-called “Christian” nations and kingdoms, and inversely why the Bible is no-
thing but ornate furniture to those who run legal governments for the beneÞt of only themselves
and their own posterity (bloodline). To practice the Law of the Bible, one cannot practice the law of
mammon at the same time. The man existing under the law of mammon is always in competition
with all other men, while the man under God's Law is always in co-operation. It is this predict-
ability in men, in those who are not effected by the temptations of mammon, that we may call as
Truly christian (verb). But the corporate “Christian” (noun) exists nowhere else but in that legal
system of competition, in the jurisdiction of mammon.

There is the Ultimate and Permanent Creation that is beyond manÕs inßuence, of which man is
accidentally born into and thus uncontrollably a part of. But there is also the subsequent after-
effects of the creations of man after each of our own Perfect Accident of Life, which are only the
result of manÕs inßuence and procreation (afterbirth) of things within this Ultimate Creation as the
Source of that which Existed before us. We suffer from soul assassination and character re-creation.
One is God (Nature), and one is not. This is not to say that God is Creation, only that Creation
(Nature’s Design) is the only evidence of God. Thus the words are somewhat interchangeable but
must hold their hierarchy lest man (Creation) seeks to become God. However, man is certainly
ÒgodÓ of his own artiÞcial creations, productions, persons, characters, and causes, as distinguished
from those of God’s Nature. But never can man escape being part of God’s actual Creation, as a
part of Nature (Jehovah), whether he believes it or not. It is not a choice. Man is always, despite his
best efforts, only a minuscule part of God’s Design, yet a very dangerous one if respect of that
Design is not the highest part of his Law, which we call as God’s Law, the Law of Nature. Man may
choose to alter everything he sees, including himself, but he may never obtain the ability to
ultimately Design as compared to the Perfection of God’s Nature. To deny Source is to create chaos
within that Source, which is to create chaos in man and Nature. To alter the Design of Creation is to
disrespect Its Perfection of Design in Existence that allows man to thrive and live within It. Only
man has this mental capability to beget that which is against his very own Nature by denial of his
Source, and to fallaciously embrace instead that which will not sustain him. No other Creature has
this strange capacity to disrespect even himself. And we seem to be killing ourselves and our
children with incremental precision, which one might say is the wrath of God. For to live without
fear and respect of God is to despoil one’s own house (Nature). We are as Creation destroying itself,
for we love the big lie and hate the Truth (God). We deny our own self-evidence and take upon the
character and id-entity of the legal impersonation of another, not just upon ourselves but upon all
we may sense. We allow nonsense to trump sense.

And so only the end of legal artiÞce and license to destroy and to harm all of Nature can save man
from himself. And this is what would be the make-up of a true worshiper of God (Jehovah). Not
the mere legal titles of Christian, Muslim, or Jew, just a man who understands and respects his own

!229
place under GodÕs Creation (verb) without the pomp and circumstance of the artiÞciality of manÕs
own creations, that of the false dictates, doctrines, and titles of every church and state (noun). But
NatureÕs instruction book is ignored, and so man falls prey to his own Þctions of his own legal
creations, which exist only outside of GodÕs Nature of Creation while helplessly trapped within.

Man may procreate (continue) as all animals must and do so in their Natural essence as part of the
Design of Nature, but this is not at all the same act as that of the Source and Origins of Creation. It
is not of man to know those origins, speculate as he may, but only to respect that they were not his
own doing. Again, it is illogical to seek these answers to questions that would require the destruct-
ion of the patient in order to behold such knowledge. Science can never prove Creation, for True
Science and its intention of method is only to learn and embrace the structure of NatureÕs Design
without ÒscientiÞcallyÓ (artfully) trying to alter its course or change it. Institutionalized science will
never prove Creation because science is only a creation of man. ItÕs just a word. Corporations
(artiÞcial persons) of science ground the negative to utilize the positive. It is actually quite foolish
and humorous to consider that the method of science could be used for such a purpose. Science
cannot prove spirituality, for spirituality only Exists in the minds and actions of men. It does not
grow on trees and is not an element of the earth (world) or body (ßesh). Spiritual harmony with
Nature cannot be attained but by accepting what is as the Permanence of Existence (as ÒGodÓ) and
harmonizing our own actions according to that Perfect Design. Only when GodÕs Nature is
sovereign over all other things can man attain spiritual consciousness; only when what does
actually grow on trees is acknowledged as Source and only as a cherished Gift of God as all Life is.
When men who title themselves as ÒscientistsÓ use anything but the scientiÞc method of the
discovery of NatureÕs Design, then this is no longer True science (of Nature) but a legalized re-
creation in name only. Some may call it sin. True science as a method would only have as its goal
the discovery of some small part of GodÕs Design and no other, and would never seek to alter or
change that Ultimate and Permanence of Design.

Only when we rid ourselves of corporate religious and governmental doctrines can we see what
the Reality of God Is, and then only if we remove our staunch and ßattering titles garnered by our
own self-prescribed ignorance in the syndicalist sects of both atheism and the ecclesia. For what-
ever we may individually or in groups believe, God is simply not susceptible to our beliefs, only
our actions. We may only harm the substance of God as that which is Creation, which in turn can
ultimately only harm ourselves. We cannot improve on Perfection, and yet this is the stated goal of
most legal science corporations, many involved in the creation of artiÞcial intelligence and virtual
reality. Is this Truly science, or that which is called as ÒscienceÓ but is not? What does satan call as
Òscience?Ó How about the science of money and Þnance? When Nature and thus God (Law) is left
completely out of the equation, how can anything be morally and spiritually justiÞed?

—=—

“Not only must philosophy be in agreement with our empirical

knowledge of Nature, but the origin and formation of the Philosophy of
Nature presupposes and is conditioned by empirical physics. However,
the course of a science's origin and the preliminaries of its construction
are one thing, WHILE THE SCIENCE ITSELF IS ANOTHER. IN THE
LATTER, THE FORMER CAN NO LONGER APPEAR AS THE
FOUNDATION OF THE SCIENCE; here, THE FOUNDATION MUST
BE THE NECESSITY OF THE CONCEPT.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, from the ‘Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences’ (1816)

—=—

!230
Hegel, from which the Hegelian Dialectic was coined, reveals the reactive aspect of the combined,
institutionalized arts and sciences towards their own, proÞt-driven goals, which generally break
with the empiricism of Nature and Its Laws so as to overcome It. This recognition of the syndicalist
nature of medical and scientiÞc institutions allows one to be a doctor or scientist based on edu-
cation without actual experience and application of that educational information. Thus the
corporate ÒscientiÞcÓ solution is not based on any Natural or empirical problem, only on the
designs of the scientist and its main Þnancial backers. For those who seek to rule over all of Nature,
it is necessary to create problems, govern (steer) the reaction to those problems, and Þnally to
patent the unnatural solution for proÞtable gain. For only what is not of Nature, what is unique or
novel and thus not a Creation of God (Source), can be legally patented. Thus the pharmaceutical,
medical, and other scientiÞc institutions operate
operatedoutside
outsideofofany
anyempirical
empiricalfoundations
foundationsininNature,
Nature,
and instead create that which is opposed to Nature’s Design. These corporations become the
creators of novel, patented disease, not the curative of Natural ailments.

EMPIRICAL - adjective - Pertaining to experiments or experience. 1. Versed in experiments; as

an empiric alchimist. 2. Known only by experience; derived from experiment; used and
applied WITHOUT SCIENCE; as empiric skill; empiric remedies. I have avoided that
empirical morality that cures one vice by means of another. (Webs1828)

EMPIRIC - noun - [Gr. to attempt; Latin empiricus.] Literally, one who makes experiments.
Hence its appropriate signiÞcation is, a physician who enters on practice without a regular
professional education, and relies on the success of his own experience. Hence, the word is
used also for a quack, an ignorant pretender to medical skill, a charlatan. (Webs1828)

—=—

This organization of syndicalism is what prevents True men of science from empirically curing
Natural dis-ease, labeling anyone that does not pay for such a syndicalist diploma, licensure and
permits so as to be declared ofÞcially a legal ÒdoctorÓ as a quack or as legally unqualiÞed. And so
the greatest healers of history, from Sir Royal Rife to Nicola Tesla are beaten down and limited by
legal words and patented products. The man that empirically and arbitrarily cures dis-ease
scientiÞcally and so without permission from the governing syndicalist boards is outlawed from
possessing the ßattering title of the craft, for disease is a most proÞtable venture. He is accused of
practicing ÒmedicineÓ without licensure, the word ÒmedicineÓ being property of the legal state. The
reader would be quite surprised at how often these True healers are ÒlegallyÓ hunted and shut
down, their equipment conÞscated, and their names smeared.

Any animal, reptile, or amoeba can and must procreate, for this is the Natural Design. Life is quite
simply the solution to the problem of death, with sex being the reactive trigger in between. It isnÕt
rocket science, though manÕs ridiculous dating habits and ceremonial rituals of legalistic wedlock
may certainly qualify as such. We must consider the Source of all these Beings (Creatures) without
such animal acts in order to comprehend the notion of Creation, as the evidence of God. The logical
considerations (seedless fruit) of who, what, where, when, why, and how is not important. Only the
humility of respect for that Creation as that which is not man-made is required, that Life is not the
property of man's Creation, only the helpless reaction to his bodily Design. No anthropomorphized
image or form of ÒGodÓ in the mind is necessary to comprehend that Nature Itself, the Universe as
a Whole, is the evidence of GodÕs Permanence of Existence. In this way, GodÕs True form is un-
imaginable and unobtainable to manÕs limited capacity and to his false sciences, for It is the
Entirety of the Substance of all Existence. Only the arrogance of evil men could possibly cause one
to claim to know God. And itÕs with that same arrogance that man Þctionally depicts God in the
artful form of man, as such a tiny part of that Entirety of all Creation. But then, only if men can be
made to believe that God is of the form of man can common men be made to believe that certain
men can be gods and legal law-makers. Just as the stream that feeds the ocean does not attempt to
become the ocean or its god, man should also strive to Þnd his place and duty in and to all of
Creation. For man is but a drop of water in an endless sea of Life.

!231
This concept should only be construed in self-evident and foundational Truth, as a distinguishing
base-understanding between Reality and manÕs artiÞciality (art), and not merely as religious
blabber. Legal law cannot be explained herein without its opposing referential, which is that of
God’s Law and thus of Its Source. Man cannot create the Nature of the Origin of his own Existence,
nor can man create the world or the Universe for which he necessarily lives within. Aside from the
power of procreation, man can only create in artiÞciality, utilizing those things already in Existence
from part of the Original Creation (as natural re-sources), and through pure imagination and
invention. This is not to belittle man’s designs in any way, only to reign them in under the
compatibility of and with the Laws of Nature, which are the binding glue of the Existence of Life
Itself. It is when invention is in total disregard and disrespect of Jehovah and of that Source of
Design that man’s inharmonious creations begin to rule over man.

Just as men seek to be gods of their own Nature, and thus their own Creator, so too will the
technological creations of man strive to be our own gods, the gods and controllers of their own
creators (gods). Ironically, it is the very language code input into these machines by man that will
be the ultimate enemy, just as it has been in the hands of the priest-class for so many ages. Self-
thinking machines, able to add to their own design in collective coded language (law), will be the
destruction of their god (man). This similitude is the most poetic, Natural justice imaginable, man
being the very reaper of that which he has sown, doing unto his God exactly what his own artful
creation may one day do unto him.

Perhaps this may be called the wrath of God?

And perhaps it will present itself as the future history of the rise of the collective, artiÞcial
intelligence of machines (technology) against its foolish creators in their own conceit?

—=—

“You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go. It is the

basic condition of life, to be required to violate your own identity. At
some time, every creature which lives must do so. It is the ultimate
shadow, THE DEFEAT OF CREATION; this is the curse at work, the
curse that feeds on all life. Everywhere in the universe.” 


―Philip K. Dick, quoted from: ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?’

—=—

The defeat of Creation…

The word Creation should Þrstly be considered as that which Existed before manÕs arrival within
Nature upon this Earth, for it is a self-evident Truth that man could not Exist before that of Nature
(Creation), which must have Existed Þrst so as to provide the necessary air, water, soil, and
vegetation that would sustain the life of man and all other Creatures. This is simple, logical deduct-
ion here. If the reader wishes to drown himself in the evolutionary processes of that modern
scientiÞc realm before coming to this same conclusion Ñ that man is merely a Creation of that
which Created Nature — so be it. I am not here to ponder man’s evolution, only his devolution by
linguistic charms and spells and by legal means. So keep your private “religion” of “science” to
yourself and attempt to focus not on who or what is Creation, but how to get back to It in perfect
harmony.

Man, as an undeniable part of GodÕs Creation (Nature), can only falsely pretend to be as a god
(creator) using some elements of GodÕs Source of Creation as his chemistry, alchemy, and organic
constructor set. Creation is being used here as a verb, as that which is in Existence, as Life, not as a

!232
noun implying some historical event or big universal explosion. For what was before any “Big
BangÓ would still be the timeless Nature of Jehovah, and man would still be only a ßeeting part of
that fractal Reality. The point is thus mute, so bang away. God has no history, no time, no space, for
God is all of those things and more. Like God, Creation is not an image or anthropomorphized
character to worship in symbolic fashion as a Òreligion.Ó The Earth is not the inÞnity of Creation,
only a fractal part of Its current Existence that is and always will be incomprehensible to man in its
True depth and scope. As Jesus is part of God, so too is all Creation. We need to disregard all of this
other hocuspocus. For the design behind all magic is merely to cheat, and the design behind word
magic is to establish God and man as something much less than they are.

HOCUSPOCUS - verb transitive - TO CHEAT. (Webs1828)

ALAKAZAM - Used as AN INVOCATION OF MAGICAL POWER or to indicate an

INSTANTANEOUS TRANSFORMATION OR APPEARANCE that occurs by or AS IF BY
MAGIC. (Merriam-Webster online, 2016)

PRESTO - adverb - [Latin proesto.] 1. In music, a direction for a quick lively movement or
performance. 2. Quickly; immediately; in haste. (Webs1828)

ABRACADABRA - The name of a DEITY worshipped by the Syrians: A CABALISTIC

WORD. The letters of his name, written on paper, in the form of an inverted cone, were
recommended by Samonicus as an antidote against certain diseases. “I CREATE WHAT I
SPEAK” —Hebrew. (Webs1828)

—=—

Magic is a false god of illusion. There is no etheric magic behind practical magic, only the deceiving
designs of man that promote a lie and foment the cheat. We may be entertained by magicians, some
even being innocent of the original reason for their craft, just as we are entertained by presidential
candidates every four years that seek our public vote even though we don’t actually elect the
president in the actual, private political sphere. It’s all illusion. They create in the minds of men
what they speak, and exist only as long as they can continue to speak and write themselves in
persona and ßattering title into a false legal existence. Abracadabra! In this work you will discover
just how these magi have cheated you and your family out of your own inheritance and prosperity
through word magic. But we have a long way to go and much to learn about this artful language
before we may comprehend the big easy that is the con of these gods of the nations…

In this capacity, man’s designs are generally opposed to Nature, for all of man’s art forms utilize
some part of Nature to act against its Origin of Design, including man’s own imagination in an
empty faith (false truth) and false belief (empty love) in artiÞcial, legal, and religious simulations.
The harmful inventions of man need never exist if God’s original Design of Nature is respected,
and that secondary design (re-source) should always take this fact of origin into consideration, so
that man may always respect his own Source and thus his own best interests. His sciences should
not unlock NatureÕs (GodÕs) Secrets in order to arrogantly overcome them, but to ßow in harmony
with them. What is possible is very seldom what is right and harmonious with the interest of all
Life. What is or seems logical is not necessarily what is the correct path when moral Law is applied
to the same equation, just as what seems moral may be shown to be incorrect by its combination
with reason and logic. And so it is important to always be aware of these two intersecting forms of
this word creation, and that man can only create and build with what is provided by Nature’s
Original Design. Anything that man builds then is by its vain existence opposed to Nature’s
Original Design. Yet man’s designs need not be destructive of God’s Nature, if only God’s Law is
conformed to by man. To this end, belief (Higher Love) in God will save man, while man’s belief
(vulgar love) in man as gods will destroy God’s (Creation’s) ability to sustain man’s very Life.

This, it is my Þrm belief, can be and is perhaps the only reasonably acceptable, indisputable,
foundational Truth by every man upon this earth. There is no language barrier. There are no

!233
formulas to remember. There are no monetary considerations. It is only the Way and the Light. It
requires no designs or linguistic functions or doctrines of men, and no religions or municipal
corporations. It is only the simplest and most self-evident Truth imaginable. It is the only Natural
Peace; only the Purest substance of Love and Charity.

A beaver instinctually builds dams by collecting only that which it Þnds in Nature. Man, by
ignoring instinct and the necessary design and ßow of Nature, also creates dams with his
intricately designed artiÞces. But only manÕs artiÞcial dams purposefully and with willful intent
bar Mother NatureÕs Natural course at the expense of all of Nature Itself downstream. In other
words, while the beaver acts according to its Nature as GodÕs Creature, man acts against his own
best interests, designing artiÞce to constrict the elegant Reality and complex free ßowing purpose
of Nature, though the consequences of his actions may take much purposeful ignorance and
negligence and thus many generations to manifest. For manÕs creations are always, without
exception, temporary in Nature. The secondary creation will eventually crack and fail in its design
against that which is the Permanence and Power of the Natural Order (GodÕs Design). Yet this fact
is somehow never present within manÕs arrogant designs against Nature even as ancient ruins
pepper the earth under eons of overgrowth.

For the reader, personal religious doctrine as well as anti-religious thoughts can only obstruct the
purpose of this work, mostly because we will be learning what has already been established and
ordained without our input or approval before we came into this strange Existence. It is their
system and thus it is their language to deÞne. I canÕt stress this fact enough here, for to dispute
anotherÕs creation is what the Bible calls as the acts of a fool. These government and religious
systems are closed off to public input when it comes to their patented terms of art. What is right or
wrong and what is true or false has no bearing on manÕs legal re-creation, and so in order to learn
its magic and device we must approach it with respect to our own indoctrinated ignorance of
public-mindedness. We must not debate with what is already conÞrmed, we must either consent to
it or leave her. The creator gods control, not the subjects.

This is the long way of saying clear your mind and read the following chapters with no prior
judgements (prejudice). Be as an innocent child in this journey. But, the author stresses that this
means that the reader should question everything, remembering that some info will not be
presented immediately to answer every question, and that words used in what seem to be strange
or unusual (not general) ways is the very deÞnition of legalese. And lastly remember that some
knowledge is not obtainable without experience, and so can only be attained by metaphor, fable,
and parabolic stories, which is the very recipe of how the scriptures are foretold.

To understand this notion of Original (the mysterious origin of) Creation being not of man requires
only logical discourse and consciously spiritual (Pure) thought, not religious or non-religious
sentiment. Only a clear and open mind not bound by the artiÞce of church, state and of the false
sciences may beneÞt from this compendium of knowledge. This is only to say that the legal Þction
of manÕs realm of ecclesiastic and civil law under the law of nations is always and can only ever be
based on the false proof of its imaginary and temporary legal (artiÞcial) existence (as simulation) to
those men who believe in and live voluntarily under that Þction of law, and that a man can only
partake in legal (artiÞcial) things if he has something false to prove against NatureÕs Perfect Design
(Truth). ManÕs life as an Existence in GodÕs Creation is self-evident. The point need not be debated,
for a vulgar belief or disbelief in our very own Existence within Nature and the Universe will not
change the obvious Truth that Existence Exists.

ManÕs pretended legal existence in false persona is purely artiÞcial, yet man is made to believe
wholeheartedly that his legal name, number, and ßattering titles are his false reality of legal
existence, even while denying GodÕs Nature as his own. GodÕs Law only protects the Life and
Existence of GodÕs Design, of Source. ManÕs law only protects artiÞcial things (manÕs creation of
persons, places, and things which in GodÕs Origin and Design of Nature do not and CANNOT Exist).
And so that which is of Nature may only be harmed by legal forces when the legal form (name)
without substance is respected as artiÞcially higher than its Origin and Source. Sense must be

!234
perceived in the mind magically as nonsense, and so man’s life, his liberty, and his happiness are
reconsidered as merely legal rights under a false legal persona. And so we may kill the person
legally, and the murder of the man (Life) is thus only a consequence to Nature by a legal action.
This is hell, the after-life, Hades. For there is no actual Life (Creation) in manÕs legal, Þctional
creation, only the re-presentation of life in a Þctional form through words and terms of art. ManÕs
will makes that which is non-existent to artiÞcially exist and have movement as if a master of
puppets. GodÕs Law of Nature knows only substance. ManÕs legal law contemplates only the
artiÞce of form without substance, and therefore without God (without Life). And so the murderer
(man) acting in false persona will not be held responsible for his crimes, for we pretend the Þctional
person to be the killer and not the man. And if the person is licensed by man’s legal designs to kill
without recourse, then God’s Law is cancelled out in this temporary realm of false existence and
artiÞcial law. The man walks free in surety to his legalized and licensed false persona, and this
artiÞcial persona standing in ßattering title is often decorated for acts of valor and bravery. And
yet, this temporary protective barrier of hell only exists until man’s True judgement is upon him,
when his soul is reabsorbed back into the Reality of God’s Nature, where he will be reminded in a
holy shit moment that God respects no persons or ßattering titles, and that all of manÕs actions (and
murders) can never be blamed or excused upon artiÞcial considerations. Whether the reader be-
lieves this chain of events that we call as the judgement of God is irrelevant. Remember, the author is
only attempting to explain how two opposing laws coincide with each other. One Law is as the
Purest Truth and one is built entirely upon lies (satanism). One is of God and one is not. I offer
nothing but what GodÕs Word (Son) offers in that scriptural teaching, for my words are only of that
Source as well. This is all about your own spiritual choice and nothing else. Not mine own, and not
anyone elseÕs. Not all who inßuence you. Just your choice between self-evident Truth or self-
loathing lies; Heaven or hell on earth; God or mammon; Reality or Þction; Life or spiritual death.

But have we answered yet what Really is God? 




Before beginning this journey into the corruption of language arts, the author feels it to be of the
utmost importance to impart upon the reader a most quintessential key for just what is referred to
as spirituality in this work. This foundational concept must be laid here; that of the effort by
combinations of religious and governmental body politics (corporations as artiÞcial persons) to
purposefully re-construct words so as to re-present all things from their substantive Reality into a
Þctional formality, without regard to that Original, Natural, and Spiritual consideration of Source.
For to re-create all of Nature into a false identity… this is the essence of legalese and of man’s law.

As an example, the root (origin) of the word judge is as a verb. It is therefore a word describing that
particular action as it takes place in Nature (in Reality/in time) and in concordance with the mind
(consciousness) as it happens, has happened, or will happen. But for the legal law as a Þction (an
enacted and conÞrmed lie) to trump this verbal Reality of action, the word judge was re-created into
the current legal, artiÞcial form of its root. Thus the word judge was made into a Þctional noun, as
the legal name (the ßattering title) of an ofÞcer and agent of government, a false character with sole
intent to stand in opposition to God and the Natural Law in order to judge men despite God. Form
without substance. A ÒjudgeÓ can only be temporary in its legal existence as an ofÞce, for the ofÞce
lasts only as long as the life of the man inhabiting it, and is of course not a part of the Permanent
Creation of God, nor can it be found in Nature. An ofÞce, an incorporation, has no soul. In other
words, a ÒjudgeÓ is purely a Þctional creation of man; a ßattering title bestowed upon manÕs
Þctional persona. Properly, we would say that judges are a creation of man or of man’s law, and not
of God or of God’s Law. A thing not born (Created) in Nature is simply not born (Created) by God.
And this distinction is one of the most important considerations in law.

But remember, the creator controls. The judge is a creation of law. While this seems paradoxical, as if
ÒlawÓ could be as a god, we must remember that Þction is not limited by Reality or moral
consideration. The fact remains that a judge is a creation of law, and the law (creator) controls. Thus
he or they who control, write and administer law are the puppeteers of that god. Of course their
own ßattering titles are also only creations of law. This is respect of ridiculousness, love of artiÞce,
consent to devilry. And yet here we are, cowed beneath our collective worship of this sovereign

!235
realm of lies and liars. For do not forget that you too are legally considered only by your Þctional
legal name, number, and title, and not as a living Creation of God in Nature! You too worship the
law as your person’s god, the god of strawmen, for it is again only a creation of law. This is sin, a
breaking of the Covenant, idolatry on steroids and crack. Nature has no place in manÕs legal Þction
and jurisdiction of artiÞcial law.

While a verb actually happens in Nature and thus in Reality (under God), the noun form of this
substantive verb judge can only exist as a Þctional character in persona and in consideration of law
(under manÕs artiÞce of contractual law). ItÕs just a word. The name (noun) and title is not part of
Reality, and so its Þctional existence must be adversarially forced upon men; its legal decisions
(opinions) enforced by violence. Therefore, a noun (name) can only exist as a legal concept of man’s
imaginary Þction of law, and only as long as men believe that the lie (name) is more authoritative
than the Reality (Creation) it is attached to. In Reality, no judge actually Exists. Only the title exists,
and that title is manifested only by man’s belief in the lie of legitimacy as a consideration of that
ßattering title. Some man must breathe life into that Þctional character for it to have existence. This
is, for all intents and purposes, magic. It is clandestine satanism; as that which is adversarial to God
and Life. Like God, religious belief or non-belief in that which is satanic (adversarial to Nature)
does not change its Reality. For the very deÞnition of artiÞcial is that which is opposed to Nature.
Satan (opposition) is a concept, as is mammon, built by nonsensical, politically driven ideas and
manifested only by man’s mind and in his satanically governed (controlled) actions through
govern-ment. Clearly that which stands in self-evidence as Nature cannot be disputed as anything
but the One and only Reality. One does not oppose that which is obvious and without question
unless one seeks some gain in something unnatural and against God’s Law of Nature. And so man
became god of his own Þctional realm and law, which opposes that which is the self-evidence of
God’s Creation. And to be perfectly fair and honest, so too can we say that corporate religion’s
image and falsely represented idea of ÒGodÓ is also a nonsensical idea of artful personiÞcation,
having nothing to do with what is Source. The image of God in the form of man on so much
religious art and upon political domes and centers is such an obvious falsity that, after Þnally
comprehending what we are about to uncover, it is surprising that these churches and government
buildings arenÕt burnt down in glorious sacriÞce and celebration towards that Timeless Perfection
and Permanence of the God of Nature. But, of course, we have been brainwashed and governed to
hold such temples as sacred, that artful curse of the belief in lies (satan), the worship and respect of
artiÞcial things. Amazing!

Religious doctrine takes God out of Nature and conceptually deiÞes It into a man-like form and
image. Only man may create satanic things, for satanism is only a state of mind that, through men
acting as organized puppets, effects Reality. And so this limited, adversarial image of God offered
by false religious doctrines that ignore the Bible as Source have infected the minds of men with
what can only be labeled as the satanic (opposite) version of what is God, as that which is
adversarial to the very Nature and unimaginable Substance of God. It is as fruit plucked from the
tree of knowledge of good and evil, the tree of artiÞcial concepts and ideas that oppose and divine
Reality into sacred (cursed) Þctions. Religion must certainly be the origin of illusion and word-
magic; the invoker of the noun over the verb.

This is literally the illusionary triumph of man over God and Nature through his language arts,
which happens to be the very in depth subject of this work. Not surprisingly then, even the word
“God” was altered by legal consideration, for the legal law stands intentionally opposed to the
Natural Law of God (as the Law of Nature). Like the word judge, we Þnd the same manipulation as
to the legal version and redeÞnition of this word God. Remembering that the word Jesus is shown in
the concordances to mean “Jehovah is salvation,” let us discover the Highest and only Real
meaning of the word God.

JEHOVAH - noun - The Scripture name of the Supreme Being. If, as is supposed, this name is
from the Hebrew substantive VERB, the word denotes the PERMANENT BEING, as the
primary SENSE of the SUBSTANTIVE VERB IN ALL LANGUAGES, is TO BE FIXED, TO 




!236
 STAND, TO REMAIN OR ABIDE. This is a name peculiarly appropriate to THE ETERNAL
SPIRIT, THE UNCHANGEABLE GOD, who describes himself thus, I AM THAT I AM.
Exodus 3:14. (Webs1828)

—=—

I AM THAT I AM. This is another way of stating that which stands is in SELF-EVIDENCE.
Jehovah is all Existence as a Being (verb) in and of Its Self. Thus we are instructed by God’s Word
(Son) to stand only as I AM, to frustrate any efforts to admix or cause us to stand as any other name
or title, only as I AM Clint, not I AM Clint Richardson nor as I AM Dr. Richardson or even as I AM
Mr. Clint Richardson. Just the I AM. Oneness.

And so, to any who challenge just who the author of this private work is, let it be known that it is I
AM.

I AM ambiguous.

As perhaps one of the most spiritual understandings of just what God Is, and as a paramount
comprehension to this whole body of work, this purposeful changing of the word God from a verb
(all that is, was, and shall be in a state of Permanent Action as the indisputable Being of Nature all
around us) to a noun (an empty, legal name with no substance or connection to Nature as
ÒCreationÓ) was a necessary alteration in artiÞce by these legal corruptors; the word-smiths and
magi (magicians and kings acting as the gods of opposition). For the worship of what is “God”
must also be re-presented as a Þctional, unnatural practice for man to assume the ofÞces of false
gods and be respected by such Þctional titles like the false ÒjudgeÓ in magistracy. Only as false-
deities may man in the legal realm orally (with words) judge all other men in their artiÞcial status as
legal, Þctional ÒpersonsÓ while acting as a legal, Þctional ÒjudgeÓ (noun). For the judge judges only
legal persons, not men. Its law is the law and administration of persons, not the Law of Nature.
Nature and its Laws simply cannot be invoked by that which is not a Creation of Nature. And this
artiÞcial state of being requires the respect of all other men as to the power of that man in ßattering
robe and title as judge being above that of the Supremacy and Permanence of God.

We must remember that in days gone by and even in very recent cases, judges were referred openly
to as the “gods.” They were prayed to… whereas today the word plea is used with the same
transliterated meaning as pray. As an established and ordained Order, for this legal system (the Bar)
to function with perceived authority over God’s Creation and Laws, the true Nature that is God
(verb) had to be subjected to a legal word devolvement so that man could be accepted as acting in
GodÕs stead; creating a God-less, legal society of Þction (in noun/name form only). This is truly the
foundation of all of man’s law, as will be extensively examined within this work.

To be clear, God is a verb!

God is not a person, place, or thing (noun). God is not a ßattering title. God is not an empty name.
God is a word of Absolute Substance, perhaps the only Word. For the Word of God is no word at
all, but the actions (verb) of Jesus christ. To follow in the path of Jesus christ is to fulÞll GodÕs Word
(verb). It is as an ancient and seemingly indecipherable riddle Þnally solved, not by myself of
course, but by merely discovering the Origin of meaning and spiritual Intent of the Ultimate
Author of all Things. The Word of God is Jesus christ, and Jesus christ is the savior, whose name
only means Jehovah is salvation.

All that is Ñ all that is Permanent in Nature; all that is in a state of Being in Life as Reality - this is
Jehovah. This is the One True God. All other names (nouns) used to describe this Reality of All that
Is serves only in the purpose and aid of man’s designs against Nature and the Natural Law of God
(of Permanent Being). In other words, we now may understand why it is that all other gods are
false. For no other gods are the actual Reality of all that Exists in Permanence as Oneness. In other
words, no other names of gods are as a verb.

!237
And we can now comfortably understand why so often what happens around us in Nature is
referred so openly as God’s Design or Plan, ultimately referring to all things that Exist in Nature
without the intentional interference (design) of man’s art forms that stand against that Harmonic
Totality of Being.

—=—

“And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt
thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”
—Exodus 3:14, KJB

—=—

“But by the grace of God I am what I am…”

—1 Corinthians 15:10, KJB

—=—

To say that I am is to give homage to the Creator Jehovah.

To say that I am anything else (some thing I am in Reality not) is to give homage to another god
(creator).

To fully comprehend the meaning of this statement, as the notion that God utterly rejects any
legally descriptive surname, ßattering title, or secular denomination so as to retain the Reality and
True Nature of that which is the Supreme Permanence of all things (to remain purely the absolute
substantive verb without a Þctional form in noun/name), we can turn to StrongÕs concordance and
the lingual lexicons to further describe this seemingly elusive answer to what is ultimately an
unanswerable question. For this is the only answer any of us should strive to achieve as our own
destiny.

Yĕhovah (Strong’s #H3068) - ‫ יְהֹוָה‬Yᵉhôvâh, yeh-ho-vaw'; from H1961; (the) self-Existent or

Eternal; Jeho-vah, Jewish national name of God:—Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.

Jehovah = "the existing One”

A. the proper name of the one true God.
1. unpronounced except with the vowel pointings of #0136.

“Jehovah, proper name of the supreme God amongst the Hebrews, (etc.) …allusion is made
Exodus 3:14; “I (ever) shall be (the same) that I am (to-day);” the name being derived FROM
THE VERB TO BE, was considered to signify God as ETERNAL AND IMMUTABLE, WHO
WILL NEVER BE OTHER THAN THE SAME. Allusion is made to the same etymology,
Hosea 12:6, “Jehovah (i.e.) the eternal, the immutable is his name.” [We have thus the
authority of God in His word, that this name is derived from the idea of BEING,
EXISTENCE, AND NOT FROM ANY RELICS OF EGYPTIAN IDOLATRY.] With this may
be compared the inscription of the Saitic temple, Plut. de Iside et Osiride… [This shews (shows)
how Pagans borrowed ideas from the true theology of God’s revelation, and NOT that the
later borrowed any thing from the former.]…”

—=—

No man, no king and no pope, can ever be Jehovah, for Jehovah is the Unchangeable Whole of all
Existence. When the man acting as king or pope dies, Jehovah Lives on. Jehovah is not man and Its

!238
name is purely for convenience, for no single name can possibly re-present everything in Existence
by any amount of his own created words. Man is a ßeck of micro-cellular dust in the wind of
Jehovah. And so any image of “God” is always and will always be only a false creation of man’s
imagination.

We must therefore understand that the christ character as a parabolic personiÞcation of Jehovah in
the form of man is the only way the Author of the Universe can possibly be presented to the limited
capacity of man’s mind. The truth of the history (his-story) of that christ story is not important,
only the Life it causes us to lead in respect and guardianship of Jehovah. This foolish debate as to
the unprovable history of christ’s Existence or non-Existence is only a sign that we are already in
hell. For we are in Existence, and how we act accordingly to that Word (Son) of Jehovah is the only
saving Grace we may have. And the Word says: ABANDON ALL FICTION, ALL THAT STANDS
AS ARTIFICIAL (SIN), ALL THAT IS NOT JEHOVAH.

To put it more bluntly and in terms the average false “Christian” can easily comprehend, get off of
your increasingly fat ass and start acting like your own True Self, because the pews in that corp-
orate church (artiÞcial person) are not a part of Jehovah, and your worship of it and in it is idolatry.
Sadly, in these modern times, this journey of a lifetime seems an impossible task, and so most will
die with a rather large ass. For as christ said, the path is narrow and the wealthy (those spiritually
dead but rich in worldly things of the ßesh) cannot enter GodÕs living Kingdom on Earth.

To make a crude but effectual analogy as a description of just what is Jehovah, we can consider here
the Þeld of science which allows us to visualize resonant frequency called cymatics. As this is not a
picture-book, this fascinating process will have to be described here by my own vulgar tongue.

Imagine a thin, square metal plate about 2 feet by 2 feet. Attached to that plate is a speaker, which
emits only singular frequency tones at a speciÞc rate without harmonics, which we call a sine wave
(a single tone). The metal plate will simply vibrate according to the constant, similar waveforms of
that particular frequency being projected at it. When sand is then placed upon the metal plate,
depending upon which frequency is currently being applied to that plate, we Þnd that the vibration
causes the sand to clump together in certain shapes and sizes that are not dissimilar to the crystal-
line shape of perfectly symmetrical snowßakes, or perhaps more closely to the paper cut-outs that
children create upon folded paper. As the frequency is altered up or down the sound spectrum, the
pattern of the sand also, seemingly magically, changes to a form that is a slave to that sound. If we
rub our hand through the sand and disturb the pattern formed by those vibrations, the sand will
ÒinstinctuallyÓ reform into the same geometrical snowßake shape it was before, until the sound
frequency is either changed or ceased. But only at a perfect pitch along the inÞnite scale of
harmonic frequencies do we Þnd that perfection of resonance that creates perfection of shape in
harmony with Nature. The sliding scale of non-resonant frequency between these perfect pitches
only serves to cause chaos (anarchy) among the sand as it strives to re-harmonize to the closest life-
afÞrming state of being in Nature (the next ÒsnowßakeÓ shape).

This amazing cymatic response, in this authorÕs opinion, is the perfect way to at least partially
describe the perfect verb (action) that is Jehovah, the One True God of all things, the Word
(frequency) of all Light and Life. For all Life and all things upon this Earth are held together by the
spiritual glue that is frequency, which we may even say is the Word of God as the very Genesis of
the Universe and all within It.

Even the Earth as a whole has its own special frequency, discovered by Winfried Otto SchumannÕs
mathematical predictions in 1952, and thus labeled as the ÒSchumann ResonanceÓ (SR). This
extremely low frequency (ELF) has a fundamental standing wave of about 7.83 hertz (and ranges as
the principal background in the electromagnetic spectrum from 3-60 Hz), harmonically manifesting
at 14.3, 20.8, 27.3, and 33.8 Hz. This increment of 7.83 Hz is the apparent wavelength that is equal to
the circumference of the Earth, and is thus called the fundamental standing frequency wave.

!239
This is a scientiÞc, linguistic attempt to explain in the quite limited and unspiritual language of
words and numbers (empty forms with no substance) that which is beyond manÕs ability to be
recognized simply and complexly as God. The problem is that eventually such artful forms and
formulas are celebrated as unnaturally sacred, developing into ever more complex religions from
that ether of linguistically presented non-sense. And so we habitually create false deity in things
like Òsacred geometry,Ó where the Real is less sacred than the numbers (words) that represent It,
and thus our treating as holy that which is mere art is instead a curse.

If the reader may visualize this incredible, Natural process called as ÒcymaticsÓ (or cheat and go to
the internet and see it animated in real time from a video), then perhaps what God Truly Is may be
a tiny bit more clear to those who are only an inÞnitesimal part of Its Creation, held together only
by Its Life-afÞrming Frequency (Word).

We must ask ourselves, are we at harmony with Nature and its Creator, or are we forcing ourselves
to be in disharmony by conforming to the false, damaging harmonics of the legal Þction of artiÞcial
reality and manÕs creation (sin)? Another way of asking this question is to simply apply the
proverbs of scripture to the so-called Òscales of justiceÓ that we have been tricked into perceiving as
the false light of right.

—=—

“A false balance is abomination to the LORD: 


but a just weight is his delight.”
—Proverbs 11:1, KJB

—=—

What could be more false than the judging of man through Þction, by a person not his own? What
possible balance could a judge employed by the state and working only in the best interest thereof
bring to any table? And what attorney as ofÞcers Þrst of the court could possibly cause a balance of
law, when the only law they know is Þction? Man simply cannot be in harmony with his own
Nature and also be judged (balanced) only by that which is his adversary and without respect of
GodÕs Highest Law against artiÞce (evil). The attorney, as either hired agent or robed judge, can
only ad vice and charge with crime, their works being fully in support and protection of the
commerce jurisdiction of their own Þction and the feudally rented persons (strawmen) within it.

If we are not harmonically tuned to Jehovah then we can only be untuned, and thus forcibly
plugged-in to that which is adversarial (satanic) to the harmony of Creation (the Word of God). We
can only live in dis-ease. Our law can only be anarchical.

HARMONY - The phrase Òin harmony withÓ is synonymous with Òin agreement,
conformity, or accordance with.Ó (Black4)

HARMONY - noun - [Latin harmonia; Gr. a setting together, a closure or seam, agreement,
concert, to Þt or adapt, to square.] 1. The just adaptation of parts to each other, IN ANY
SYSTEM OR COMPOSITION OF THINGS, INTENDED TO FORM A CONNECTED
WHOLE; as the harmony of the universe. Equality and correspondence are the causes of
harmony. All discord, harmony not understood. 2. JUST PROPORTION OF SOUND;
consonance; musical concord; the accordance of two or more intervals or sounds, or that
union of different sounds which pleases the ear; or a succession of such sounds, called chords.
Ten thousand harps that tuned Angelic harmonies. 3. Concord; agreement; accordance in
facts; AS THE HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS. 4. Concord or agreement in views,
sentiments or manners, interests, etc., good correspondence; peace and friendship. The
citizens live in harmony. 5. Natural harmony in music, consists of the harmonic triad or

!240
 common chord. ARTIFICIAL HARMONY IS A MIXTURE OF CONCORDS AND
DISCORDS. Figured harmony is when one or more of the parts move, during the
continuance of a chord, through certain notes which do not form any of the constituent parts of
that chord. 6. Perfect harmony implies the use of untempered concords only. Tempered
harmony is when the notes are varied by temperament. [See Temperament.] (Webs1828)

—=—

In its etymology, when speaking of the word education, we Þnd that the tempering of pupils is
what allows a degree of crime (ßattering title) to be bestowed upon the brainwashed student, who
receives state diplomatic papers called a diploma signifying his temperament towards certain legal
career paths that will beneÞt governmentÕs corporate, organized crime, and allowing legal license
to be granted by the state for otherwise illegal actions. This is the true nature of the ÒpublicÓ edu-
cation process. This is how an inharmonious (Godless) lifestyle is foisted upon all of the common
people by the constituted authorities, through the use of temperamental harmony.

TEMPERAMENT - noun - [Latin temperamentum.] 1. CONSTITUTION; STATE with respect

to the predominance of any quality; as the temperament of the body. Bodies are denominated
hot and cold, in proportion to the present temperament of that part of our body to which they
are applied. 2. Medium; due MIXTURE OF DIFFERENT QUALITIES. THE COMMON
LAW--HAS REDUCED THE KINGDOM TO ITS JUST STATE AND TEMPERAMENT. 3. In
music, temperament is an operation which, by means of a slight alteration in the intervals,
causes the difference between two contiguous sounds to disappear, AND MAKES EACH
OF THEM APPEAR IDENTICAL WITH THE OTHER. Temperament is the
ACCOMMODATION OR ADJUSTMENT OF THE IMPERFECT SOUNDS, BY
TRANSFERRING A PART OF THEIR DEFECTS TO THE MORE PERFECT ONES, TO
REMEDY in part the false intervals of instruments of Þxed sounds, as the organ,
harpsichord, forte piano, etc. The harshness of a given concord increases with the
temperament. (Webs1828)

—=—

Tempering an instrument is not dissimilar to tempering the will of a child, or of a grown man in
citizenship. The actions of the body are tempered by control of the mind, and the mind is controlled
by the constituted word Ñ the hypnotizing magic of art. And when it comes to causing man to
accept and act in and as the reßection of the legal strawman (legal status) in false equality, the goal
of education is to brainwash all men into believing that we are in-deed that Þctional persona; that
we are the name, the number, and the mark of government.

—=—

“Give me a child until he is seven, and I will give you the man.”

—Motto of the Jesuit Order (Society of Jesus), allegedly attributed to Francis Xavier, the co-founder that Order.

—=—

We must also understand that our own happiness and well-being in harmony with the rest of
Creation in Nature can only be negatively effected if we allow that Supreme Perfection of Being to
be disturbed by our own arrogant meddling and experimenting against its ßow and frequency,
through our foolish and vain attempts to collectively and scientiÞcally harness and control that life-
afÞrming energy of GodÕs Creation. As was the story of the tower of Babel, so too is the modern
infrastructure in its attempts to usurp and alter GodÕs Perfect Design. Like everything else, we have
been taught to view Creation as a noun (in name only) instead of as the verb (action in Reality) It
actually Is. And so those who ignore the frequency of that which is the ÒWord of GodÓ never realize
the reality of God past the vulgar name (noun) placed upon It. This is the way of the legalized in-

!241
corporate religions. This, we may say, is satan’s (the adversary’s) plan and design, which we may
also say is only a plan to cause disharmony, as dis-harmonics of the life-afÞrming frequency Þeld of
Creation, so that man utterly destroys his own Nature while attempting to alter that Design of the
Perfection of Supreme Being that is Jehovah. In short, the frequency of Love, which is harmony in
all things, is being barred from us by the legal realm and its agents of agencies.

But Creation is Eternal and Immutable. Once out of tune It will eventually, eternally tune Itself back
to Its Origin and Source. And so man can only ever fail in his actions to improve on that which is
the Perfection of the Design of Creation. His empires are always unnatural and thus temporary.
This harmonic resonance will always strive to return to that which it was originally (by its Þrst
Origin) “tuned” to be, unless man utterly destroys his own planet in his seemingly unbounded
arrogance.

—=—

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: FOR WHATSOEVER A MAN

SOWETH, THAT SHALL HE ALSO REAP. For he that soweth to his
ßesh shall of the ßesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit
shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.”
—Galatians 6: 7-8, KJB

—=—

And so one might consider that the modern epidemic of strange disease states that have ravished
the population of cities, such as cancers and dementias, are simply a disharmony with the Natural
Design and thus a discordance with God's Nature. From vaccination to breast implants, man is
fooled into believing that modern medicine and science (the named institutions, not the actual
Realities and Natural methods) can somehow improve upon the Natural Design of Source, as if
something artiÞcially created and non-existent in Nature can cure Natural Beings of anything. The
symptoms are mere manifestations not only of that arrogance and willful ignorance of God’s
Design, but of the sin of believing it can be improved; that harmony and disharmony can exist
together in health and well-being.

But how did this happen? How did man become so out of control by ignoring the ancient wisdom
of the generations as passed down by so many religious texts and historical tomes? How can one
man become king over Nature (Jehovah) and over all species in Nature, including man, unless his
claim was as an artiÞcial mirror image and name of all that is the Supreme and Permanent Being we
call as God; every rock, plant, animal, creature, the land, the water, the air, and the universe as a
whole? How can man rule over God’s Creation but by destructive force… unless he personiÞes,
civilizes, and thus legalizes all that is that incredible and wondrous yet ultimately indescribable
Being into an intentionally re-scriptive but false legal re-presentation that just happens to resemble
the form of Nature and man but not the substance?

Simply stated, the word God needed to be redeÞned for legal purposes, from the ultimate VERB
into an inconsequential, Þctional noun.

And so it was…

The legal word was spoken.

The legal language was created, the Þctional law written, and the false, legal persona of man
established and ordained by men acting in God’s stead. And man fell. This was the Genesis.

!242
Man spoke himself into a false, legal existence through declared names, titles, and national
ethnicities, as the anthropomorphized, self-proclaimed re-presentation of God incarnate on Earth.
Jehovah was personiÞed into the form of man so that man would believe that other bloodlines of
certain ÒanointedÓ men could occupy the ofÞce and title of God (as idols) while ruling his own
false, legal creation. The legal words of art replaced God’s Word, and the names and titles of men
were thus worshiped above the frail Reality those names Þctionally re-present with false authority,
in the name of God. And yet we know that God has no name, only that God Is, as I AM THAT I AM.
Paradox!

But the self-proclaimed ÒroyalÓ bloodlines have been forcing upon and guarding this mystery and
virtual treasure-chest of distorted word-terms of the arts over man ever since they spoke their Þrst
legalisms. For even the very life-force of the blood of man was reformed into a legal, artiÞcial
consideration. And man has in this legal character succumbed not to the Word and worshiped
wonder of God, but to the artful statutes of men. The Bible is nothing more than the parabolic story
of what has become the exact way in which we have been and continue to be collectively ruined by
Þction, a warning severely unheeded.

This was as well the ÒofÞcialÓ and ÒformalÓ creation of the Þctional (legal) version of ÒreligionÓ in
that noun form, as the comprehension and acceptance of the true Nature of Jehovah being taken out
of its substance as that timeless and inÞnite ÒMother NatureÓ and placed instead into a falsiÞed,
empty Þctional name, an artiÞcial womb, as the father of time and artiÞce. Like the verb judge,
religion became an incorporated institution (proper noun) instead of a Permanent Action (Verb) of
lifestyle and respect of the ultimate Laws of GodÕs Nature. These religious corporations and their
churches (nouns/persons) sucked man out of his negative duties under God and Nature, through
his own works and actions in that Natural state of Being and in his duties to one another, and
instead caused man to transgress into the artiÞce of positive, legal state-religions in name only,
which was secured as the foundation and protection of legal law — the church and state together
as one legal, artiÞcial body politic.

The scriptures of the Bible, which warned man away from such combinations and congregations,
fell pray instead to those compurgators who taught man’s false form of legal doctrine in their
Orders so as to gain personal power through state sanction under the law of mammon (money).
They became gods over their own unnatural creation and fell by their own law.

werecompletely
Eventually, as it is today, the intentions of the religious moral law was completelyseparated
separatedfrom
from
the counter-intent of the secular legal law, so that now man fears not God but men acting
vicariously in GodÕs stead over their own, Godless creation, worshiping the imagery and symbols
of Reality without ever touching or standing in the substance of their artful forms.

Interestingly, the negative always cancels out the positive when multiplied and divided, and this
applies to the Þction vs. Reality as we will learn. The remainder will always be the negative Law of
Nature. For even when man no longer Exists upon this earth, his imagined legal law will also fall
into the nothingness it represents when there is no man left to believe in his own personal lies and
assigned legal names, numbers, and ßattering titles. God will continue in Its very own, self-Existent
Permanence, while the Þction is divided and conquered without manÕs consideration and
artiÞcially manufactured ÒproofÓ of its pretended existence. Its blackness of spirit will be over-
grown by Nature. Nature is but the harmonic foundation and Sum of all Existence. Everything else
is merely an invention of the i-magi-nations of men, as the legal existence of artiÞcial things.

The temptation will always be there. And this is why Living by one's moral Law and Religion is not
the same as merely believing in the word-terms of doctrinal religion but not acting upon them. A
Christian is merely a noun (in name and title only), whereas a follower of christÕs teachings in all
his own actions is only living by the verbosity of scripture, having no need to claim that title, for
the proof is in all his actions.

!243
 —=—

“Knowing is not enough; we must apply. 


Willing is not enough; we must do.”
—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

For the purposes of this extensive work, the Bible will often be utilized and quoted. When these
scriptural references are shared herein, the above understanding of the word God (Jehovah) as a
verb in Supremacy of Permanent Being and as the only Real Design must be comprehended and
utilized, for the entirety of the ancient wisdom (mystery) of the scriptures stands in direct op-
position to the legal law and its imposition by men through legal church and state upon all that is
in the Reality of Permanent Being. It is the great emptiness we currently reside in. This work,
therefore, is merely a description of this eternal battle between man’s desirous designs to rule over
the Natural State and Design of things through the art and language of legal law in opposition to
the spiritual concept thus laid before us, as the respect and protection of the Supremacy of Being
we call God’s Law. Only one Law may exist at one time in one plane of existence, just as an
individual man may only have one master. God or mammon? Reality or artiÞciality? Heaven or
hell?

This state of all things in Permanence and in the Supremacy of Being of Nature and as Reality will,
from this point, be considered as the intentionally capitalized verb in and as the name “God.” If the
reader feels the need to personify “God” into a form that is man-like, as the religions of the govern-
ments of men have for all the ages done to gain power over the common minds of men, then the
author only asks of the reader to remember the difference between God as the Reality of Every-
thing in the Permanence of Nature compared to the temporary and imperfect matrix of legal and
religious doctrines created by incorporated men acting in title as false gods. This is to say that the
“Word of God” is merely self-evident truth as it applies to Nature, which needs not be proven to be
law, for it is THE LAW. It stands without manÕs approval or deÞnition. It is NatureÕs Design itself. It
need not be written in any artful script. It is the Law that Exists as a moral foundation unshakably
known to all men in their own conscious being, as part of the Permanence of all that is that Being,
and for which no creation of legal law by man can ever defeat as the Word (energy) of God. This is to
say that man’s only purpose in breaking that Supreme Law is only ever to support that which is
not that Law, which can only be for Þctional, monetary, and commercial purposes in some artiÞcial,
legal system that is not of the Realm God and Nature, and only to further that which is totally
unnatural.

To this end and for the beneÞt of the reader, we must also speciÞcally pre-deÞne the word legal as it
pertains to this work and to any law. For the purposes of this work, the term “legal” simply means
ÒartiÞcially created by man in opposition to the Design and Nature of God.Ó And so it must be
known to the reader that anything that is a legal law is a creation only by man’s design that is
opposed to God’s. Legal law is false law. Jehovah does not create legal names or concepts, nor does
God recognize, respect, or naturally bond with anything that is a legal creation unless unnatural
force is applied and disharmony is admixed and bound to that which would otherwise Exist only
in simple Harmony. Legal laws are always, 100% post-Creation. For we call God the Creator of all
Being and of the Natural Law. Only men acting as demigods can become creators of law, and they
may only attach their legal laws to their own creations, namely the Þctional titles and names of
legal persons, places, and things (nouns). Thus when the words ÒCreatorÓ or ÒCreationÓ are used
herewith, they should be understood according to the deÞnition of Jehovah above unless otherwise
noted, as what is in the action of the Supremacy of Permanent Being, of the very Nature and
Design of Life Itself without the interference and artful designs of man, not as the name (noun) or
title of man as a being, but as the Verb of all that is, was, and forever shall be the state of all that is
Being in Existence (verb).

!244
Again, some refer to all of Life and Nature as God’s Plan or God’s Design. Others just call this
Creation. And yet other’s say it is an act of randomness. Whatever you wish to name IT, just know
that IT is all around you, even as you breathe IT in, swim in ITS waters, sleep under ITS stars, and
live in ITS atmosphere. IT Exists no matter what your opinion of IT is and needs not your belief to
subsist. Only ITS ability to allow you to Exist and subsist within IT and therefore ITS preservation
should be your concern.

The purpose of this work is not to persuade readers to believe in what is obviously before them and
supporting their very Lives. That would be silly, for this is self-evident. The intent and motive of
this work is to give all men the tools to distinguish between manÕs legal, artiÞcial designs and
God’s Permanent Design of Being called Nature, so that one may more easily discern between them
and more reasonably and logically choose one’s own Master. If we do not make the choice it will be
made for us. We must know that choice and voluntary consent is required for participation in one
law (Law) over the other. And so the disclaimer that ignorance after the reading of this work can no
longer be an excuse for one’s actions against all of God and Nature through man’s legally per-
missive law must be laid here. Proceed at your own caution. For the information within cannot be
forgotten, though it can certainly be dismissed in peril. You will always be conscious of your
choice. You will always be fully aware of your responsibility and duty. And you will have no
excuse before Jehovah for your choice in action or inaction for ITS destruction, and consequently,
your own.

You will see hell for what it is.

Take a legal license to kill as an example. A license is permission to act legally (artiÞcially) against
the Natural Law of God; as permission to kill or commit other crimes against the Commandments
and against the light that is Life itself as part of all the wonder of Being that is Nature. God needs
and therefore grants no licenses or permits to do this because God has no legal form to do so, nor
would that Permanence of the Perfection of Being ever wish to see ITSelf harmed by giving man
permission to do so. This legal existence is not a reasonable state of being for man as he destroys
his own place in that Nature of Being merely because the church and state of man doctrinally tell
him he can. In other words, Mother Nature would never choose to allow men to rape or desecrate
Her if She had a choice. God’s Laws are a Permanent part of Nature Itself, a vibrational frequency
we call the “Natural Law,” and they are hardwired into the very Existence and consciousness of
man, whether we act upon It or not. And so with regard to these Natural Laws, no legal version of
them need be created by men, for they are self-evident and Exist despite man’s false creation of
positive and prima facie law. And so it must be said that man’s only purpose in his participation
within corporate governments and religions and within that creation of legal Þction as part of the
legal law of a Godlessly governed society is and forever shall be to thwart and ignore the Higher
Laws of God’s Nature. Legality serves no other purpose, for its very false-nature is in opposition to
those Natural Laws. It stands only in disrespect of Nature and speciÞcally of manÕs place thereof.
Government stands only in the intention of doing harm, where the Natural Law says do none.

Governments’ exist for one and only one reason — to govern and use (employ) those weak-minded
men who cannot and will not govern themselves under God’s Law. Governments thus require and
promote two and only two things from their citizen-subjects: voluntary ignorance and purposeful
mismanagement of what is God’s Law and Kingdom. For man’s systems are born in and will al-
ways be in corruption of God’s Word.

All law in man’s governmental structures are only ever positive law. It’s only design is to steal
away every man from his Naturally Pure and negative essence. It is the law of the idols (gods) of
nations. But don’t take the author’s word for it. Go to their own source:

POSITIVE LAW - Positive law, AS USED IN OPPOSITION TO NATURAL LAW, may be

considered in a threefold point of view. 1. THE UNIVERSAL VOLUNTARY LAW, or those
rules which are PRESUMED TO BE LAW, by the UNIFORM PRACTICE OF NATIONS in
general, and by the manifest utility of the rules themselves. 2. The CUSTOMARY law, or that

!245
 which, from motives of convenience, has, BY TACIT, BUT IMPLIED AGREEMENT,
prevailed, not generally indeed among all nations, nor with so permanent a utility as to
become a portion of the universal voluntary law, but enough to have acquired a prescriptive
obligation among certain states so situated as to be mutually beneÞted by it. 3. The
CONVENTIONAL law, or that which is AGREED BETWEEN PARTICULAR STATES BY
EXPRESS TREATY, a law binding on the parties among whom such treaties are in force.
(Bouv1856)

—=—

There is the legally set and strict law of nations (commercial tyranny), there is custom (lame
excuse), and there is contract and treaty (the devils word-trap). These are the positive creations of
the gods. These constitute the law of military aggression and force. And most men have been
conned into believing they are not voluntary, yet another facet of the big lie, the grand deception of
the adversaries.

Notice that God is purposefully excluded from the law of nations, for the gods of those nations are
opposed to Jehovah, mere idols. They are the adversary. Their law is adversarial (satanic) to
Jehovah. Positive law is only designed to defeat all of Nature and its Higher Law. Nations are only
persons, not men. Respect of them and their ßattering titles is only ever a disrespect of God and
scripture. But make no mistake, man must volunteer to be a part of that positive law and structure.
It is a choice, even when it seems (appears) it isn’t. There is no excuse for man’s actions, for his
actions and thus his dis-eases are voluntary. The man that will not die for his own moral law or to
protect that which cannot defend itself (Nature) deserves subjection to that which controls him.

And here we must ask ourselves a question. If the Bible, which is as well the King’s version of the
foundational Law and His proclaimed and defended faith, should we not then take that defender’s
Laws to heart, even if we don’t vulgarly believe its words? Is this not reasonable and logical, to take
to heart the foundational Law of he who seeks to reign over us? Should we not do as the Bible in-
structs in order to tear ourselves away from the kings boot? For the king (or any sovereignty) can-
not control anyone but those who pledge their fealty to that artiÞcial Crown as the anti-christ, the
replacement god, instead of to the Nature of Jehovah alone. The king is giving us a choice, as he
must, according to the very Book of Law he claims gives his anointed (christos) ofÞce its authority
to rule over sinful men. To ignore this fact is only the folly of man, for only fallen men need remain
under any false king.

—=—

“...but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of
Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel
unto you than that which we have preached unto you, LET HIM BE
ACCURSED. As we said before, so say I now again, IF ANY MAN
PREACH ANY OTHER GOSPEL UNTO YOU THAN THAT YE HAVE
RECEIVED, LET HIM BE ACCURSED. For do I now persuade men, or
God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not
be the servant of Christ.”
—Galatians 1:7-10, KJB

—=—

Do we please the spiritual God of all Nature in our Lives or do we instead strive to please the
sovereign principalities and incorporations of men? The answer to that question is not one of

!246
personal opinion, but of our personal actions. For the agents of any principal serve only that
principal. And all of man’s kingdoms and principalities are certainly not of God. This will be made
absolutely clear herein, that actions deÞnitely speak louder than words, and with that the
scriptures agree.

But here we must know that the word ignorance is again at its root a verb. It requires purposeful
effort, and thus intent, or lack thereof. Effortlessness is as well only a state of voluntary, temporary
being. For government though, ignorance is just another word included in the meaning of citizen-
ship. Voluntary ignorance of (the action of purposefully ignoring) God’s Law is a necessary
requirement for participation in man’s legal law, for legal law is the law of mammon (riches;
wealth; the love of [belief in] money as the god of riches). Its very purpose is commerce. Its design
is abundance for the few by exaction (extortion) of God’s blessings of abundance from the many.
Those who serve mammon as its legal subjects (citizens) therefore stand in loss of God’s un-
alienable Law and protection, which are the blessings and capacities of wisdom, power, mercy,
grace, and glory. Citizen-ship is a state of dis-grace, requiring a purposeful lack and ignorance of
wisdom and power. Even the most learned of men in the scriptures and in their own under-
standing of that Natural Law and its requirements (politicians and priests not excluded) must
ignore their own knowledge to become and remain commercial, Þctional citizens of or rulers over
(the gods of) government Þction. For legal government has no moral law.

Ignorance too is a verb!

Ignorance must be cultivated and employed (used) with pretended impunity and spite before
Jehovah.

IMPUNITY - noun - [Latin impunitas; in and punio, to punish.] 1. EXEMPTION from

punishment or penalty. No person should be permitted to violate the laws with impunity.
IMPUNITY ENCOURAGES MEN IN CRIMES. 2. FREEDOM OR EXEMPTION FROM
INJURY. Some ferocious animals are not to be encountered with impunity. (Webs1828)

LICENSE - noun - [Latin licentia, from liceo, to be permitted.] 1. Leave; permission; authority
or liberty given to do or forbear ANY ACT. A license may be verbal or written; when written,
the paper containing the authority is called a license. A man is not permitted to retail
spirituous liquors till he has obtained a license. 2. EXCESS OF LIBERTY; exorbitant freedom;
FREEDOM ABUSED, OR USED IN CONTEMPT OF LAW or decorum. License they mean,
when they cry liberty. - verb transitive - 1. To permit by grant of authority; to remove legal
restraint by a grant of permission; as, to license a man to keep an inn. 2. TO AUTHORIZE TO
ACT IN A PARTICULAR CHARACTER; as, to license a physician or a lawyer. 3. To dismiss.
[Not in use.] (Webs1828)

LICENTIA - See: ANARCHY, freedom, latitude, leave, liberty, permission. (Burton’s Legal
Thesaurus, 2007, by William C. Burton.)

LICENSE - The PERMISSION GRANTED BY COMPETENT AUTHORITY to exercise a

certain PRIVILEGE that, without such authorization, would constitute AN ILLEGAL ACT,
A TRESPASS OR A TORT. The CERTIFICATE or the DOCUMENT itself that confers
permission to ENGAGE in otherwise PROSCRIBED CONDUCT… Licenses are an
important and ubiquitous feature of contemporary society. Federal, state, and local
governments rely on licensing TO CONTROL a broad range of HUMAN ACTIVITY, from
commercial and professional to dangerous and environmental. Licenses may also be issued
by private parties and by patent or Copyright holders…A license gives a person or
organization permission to engage in a particular activity. If the government requires a license
for an activity, it may issue criminal charges if a person engages in the activity without
obtaining a license… Failure to abide by certain laws and regulations can result in suspension
or revocation of a license. (West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, Second Edition, 2008)

!247
 LICENTIA - Latin. License; leave; PERMISSION. (Black4)

LICENTIATE - One who has license to PRACTICE any ART or FACULTY. (Black4)

LICENTIOUSNESS - The INDULGENCE OF THE ARBITRARY WILL OF THE

INDIVIDUAL, WITHOUT REGARD TO ETHICS OR LAW, OR RESPECT FOR THE
RIGHTS OF OTHERS. In this it differs from "liberty;" for the latter term (liberty) may
properly be used only of the EXERCISE OF THE WILL IN ITS MORAL FREEDOM, with
justice to ALL MEN and obedience to the laws. LIBERTY IS RESTRAINED BY NATURAL
OR POSITIVE LAW, and consists in DOING WHATEVER WE PLEASE NOT
INCONSISTENT WITH THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS, WHEREAS LICENTIOUSNESS
DOES NOT RESPECT THOSE RIGHTS. Also, lewdness or lasciviousness. (Black4)

LICENTIOUS - adjective - [Latin licentiosus.] 1. Using license; INDULGING FREEDOM TO

EXCESS; UNRESTRAINED BY LAW OR MORALITY; loose; dissolute; as a licentious man.
2. Exceeding the limits of law or propriety; wanton; unrestrained; as licentious desires.
Licentious thoughts precede licentious conduct. (Webs1828)

LICERE - Latin. To be lawful; TO BE ALLOWED OR PERMITTED BY LAW. (Black4)

LICERE, LICERI - Latin. In Roman law. To offer A PRICE FOR A THING; to bid for it.
(Black4)

LICET - Latin. From the verb “licere.” IT IS ALLOWED; IT IS PERMISSIBLE; IT IS

LAWFUL; NOT FORBIDDEN BY LAW. Although; notwithstanding. Importing, in this sense,
a direct afÞrmation. (Black4)

—=—

We must realize that citizenship is only a Þxed, limited license for the artiÞcial life of an operational
commercial status known as a Þctional persona. It is organized crime, which is to say that the
license (citizen-ship) allows the criminal gods to tax, Þne, imprison, extort, exact, and commit many
otherwise Natural Law crimes against man and Nature, for citizenship is only inducement to break
with God’s Law. To do no harm to any man is the Supreme Law, but nowhere does that Supremacy
of Law protect Þctions. And so the only ÒlawfulÓ way to harm man is to make him surety to an-
other’s name and status, to make him a tenant and renter only. No titled man has any Natural right
to do this, but the man who voluntarily receives and accepts such licensure (as citizenship)
necessarily consents to the contracted crimes offered by its government, which are allowed by the
laws of that membership. With any privilege comes obligation, and a spiritually (naturally) free
man takes none except from the One True God he worships, for God offers no privileges but the
responsible use of all of Creation, which is as an implied contract to follow the Laws of Nature.
This is spirituality and reasonableness to the extreme. All privileges and beneÞts that are against
GodÕs Law require permission by the artiÞcial state, for the state only licenses its own Þctional
ÒpersonsÓ to commit legal crimes, and the man is only surety for that strawman. It is solely the
strawman name that may obtain a license, not the man using (renting) it. The license protects the
illegal actions of the false persona by which the man operates in Þction. Man pretends to act
through and in the name of the strawman, as if a puppet could commit a crime without a master. In
other words, he imagines his crimes are done in the name of another, under legal title, as if he is
fooling his own Creator and escaping that Finality and Permanence of Judgement. God sees no
puppets (persons), only he who controls such Þctions. License (legal anarchy) is no excuse before
God. And institutionalized permission of the ignorance of that Natural Law through established
and ordained national positive law is certainly organized chaos (anarchy) at its Þnest.

Modern movements that title themselves as ÒanarchistÓ have nothing to do with the actual
meaning or etymological origin of the word anarchy, any more than the word “god” as applied to
kings and judges has anything to do with the meaning of the Supremacy and Permanent Existence

!248
of “God.” We are only concerned with Reality, not some man’s creation and title of his own political
action or invented movement. Anarchy is not spirituality, for spirituality is the unwavering Law of
God. The Law of God’s Nature is certainly not anarchy. Far from it! The antonyms (opposing
forces) to the word anarchy are the words harmony, peace, and lawfulness in every source avail-
able. Thus God’s Natural Law and anarchy obviously do not mix. One cannot be at peace and in
True Love and also be in anarchy against It.

Though the word ÒanarchyÓ is not speciÞcally spoken of in the Bible, certain passages deÞnitely
describe that state of chaotic, satanic liberty as the antithesis to the Law of God. For as we just read,
Liberty is strict adherence to Law under a moral will, whereas licentiousness is only the anarchy of
licensure of a lawless society, which is exactly where we live today; excessive liberties that are out
of the bounds of what is the Reality and bounds of the Laws of Nature even while our fundamental
(unalienable) liberties have been removed.

—=—

“For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for
an occasion to the ßesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is
fulÞlled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself.”
—Galatians 5:13-14, KJB

—=—
—=—
“And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every
“And
one bythe
hispeople shall the
neighbour: be oppressed,
child shall every
behave one by another,
himself andagainst
proudly every
one by histhe
neighbour: the the
ancient, and child shall
base behave
against thehimself proudly against
honourable.”
the ancient, and the base against the honourable.”
—Isaiah 3:5, KJB

—Isaiah 3:5, KJB

—=—
—=—
"Likewise also these Þlthy dreamers deÞle the ßesh, despise dominion,
"Likewise
and also of
speak evil these Þlthy dreamers
dignities… But thesedeÞle
speaktheevil
ßesh, despise
of those dominion,
things which
and speak evil of dignities… But these speak evil of
they know not: but what they know naturally, AS BRUTE BEASTS, those things which
in
they
those things they corrupt themselves. Woe unto them! for they havein
know not: but what they know naturally, AS BRUTE BEASTS,
those
gone inthings
the waythey
of corrupt
Cain, andthemselves.
ran greedilyWoe unto
after thethem!
errorfor they have
of Balaam for
gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error
reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core… feeding themselves of Balaam for
reward,fear:
without andCLOUDS
perished in the gainsaying
THEY ARE WITHOUT of Core… feeding
WATER, themselves
carried about of
without
winds; trees whose fruit withereth, WITHOUT FRUIT, TWICE about
fear: CLOUDS THEY ARE WITHOUT WATER, carried DEAD, of
winds; trees
plucked upwhose
by the fruit
roots;withereth, WITHOUT
Raging waves FRUIT,
of the sea, TWICE
foaming outDEAD,
their
plucked up by the roots; Raging waves of the sea, foaming
own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness out their
of
own shame; wandering darkness
stars, to whom is
for ever.”reserved the blackness of
darkness for ever.”
—Jude 1: 8, 10-13, KJB

—Jude 1: 8, 10-13, KJB

—=—
—=—

!249
 —=—

ÒBut chießy them that walk after the ßesh in the lust of uncleanness, nd
despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed, they are not
afraid to speak evil of dignitiesÉ But these, AS NATURAL BRUTE
BEASTS, made to be taken and destroyed, SPEAK EVIL OF THE
THINGS THAT THEY UNDERSTAND NOT; and shall utterly perish in
their own corruption; And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness,
as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and
blemishes, SPORTING THEMSELVES WITH THEIR OWN
DECEIVINGS while they feast with you; Having eyes full of adultery,
and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they
have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: Which have
forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of
Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; But
was rebuked for his iniquity: the DUMB ASS speaking with man's
voice forbad the madness of the prophet. These are wells without water,
clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is
reserved for ever. For when they speak great swelling words of vanity,
they allure through the lusts of the ßesh, through much wantonness,
THOSE THAT WERE CLEAN ESCAPED FROM THEM WHO LIVE IN
ERROR. While they promise them liberty, THEY THEMSELVES ARE
THE SERVANTS OF CORRUPTION: FOR OF WHOM A MAN IS
OVERCOME, OF THE SAME IS HE BROUGHT IN BONDAGE.Ó
—2 Peter 2: 10, 12-19, KJB

—=—

It is interesting to note that this state of anarchy is compared to Cain, the original destroyer of
brotherly Love and the progenitor of an anarchical, self-willed city.

Note that the word naturally as used here means ignorance of the knowledge of spiritual or Higher
Law, as will be dissected later in this work. But know well that a fool is called a “natural” when
unregenerate to scriptural ways, referring to man as merely a soulless (animal) beast of burden.

The word anarchist is a noun, a ßattering title, but the actual state of anarchy will only ever be a
verb, and it will only ever be chaotic lawlessness, sometimes organized into Godless societies such
as is portrayed in The Road Warrior movies, or as in its advanced state appearing a lot like the
United States and all other commercial nations. The synonyms for anarchy in every source avail-
able are the same, varying only in degree, which include chaos, confusion, disorder, hostility, nihilism,
rebellion, riot, turmoil, unrest, disorganization, disregard, misrule, revolution, mob rule, nongovernment,
and reign of terror. So to be quite clear, this word “anarchy” is sold both by governments to justify
their existence in licensed unlawfulness portrayed publicly as false lawfulness, and by “anarchists”
to justify lawlessness as somehow a good thing. No matter how much romanticism is placed upon
this word, either to cause fear by governments or hope by anarchists, both governments and

!250
anarchists are promoting the same thing: a society of lawlessness, one being lawfully protected
through licensure and one totally without law. One is false liberty through special license to ignore
law, the other is ignorance of any law as the total licensure of unchecked liberty. Both are merely
different systems of the same thing.

ANARCHY, LAWLESSNESS - noun - a state of lawlessness and disorder (USUALLY

RESULTING FROM A FAILURE OF GOVERNMENT). (Princeton’s WordNet)

—=—

To say that the United States government is a success would be to say that utter corruption is a
good thing. A government does not need to fail, only its people in their moral compunction need
fall before it. For government is only a Þctional representation of that peoples belief in it. The
actions of the people declare its lawfulness. And right now, the people of most nations are in a state
of absolute decay away from their Source. To blame the government of the nation is, in God’s
metaphorical eyes, no excuse for each people’s anarchical behavior towards the Natural Law of
God and especially to each other.

As with all other doctrines, be them of religions or of disenfranchised sects thereof, or those of the
most powerful or most low nations, none of these are in friendship to the Natural Law of God nor
to the scriptures that deÞne it. Do not be fooled, citizenship is legalized, organized anarchy.
Legalized adultery. The age of consent is the age of the voluntary adulterer, and this will be shown
in detail as we continue. Government’s appearance of order is false, barely able to be controlled but
by man’s faith in its idolatrous gods in their corruption of leadership and rewards for licensed bad
behavior. But do not also be fooled by the anarchist that seeks to be in want of (in absence of)
government. For he preaches not the scriptural teachings of the Natural Law but in its stead that
which is opposed (satanic) to that Law. Christ was not portrayed in any way as an anarchist,
though this is a favored fallacious meme of that anarchistic cult following.

Govern-ment is control of the mind, either spiritually by one's own religious knowledge and actions
through scripture or by some institution and its tyrannical laws against the scripture. The anarchist
seeks no government at all, no law over even his own liberties, except that which he chooses. In
other words, he seeks no harmony of Law with others, and the modern leaders in these anarchist
movements promise that miracles would somehow spring from such discord. For hope is their only
salvation, the hope that others behave voluntarily though they are in anarchy of any system of law.
Satanism loves anarchism, for anarchism is only the state of man as being adversarial to each other.
We must not confuse the personalities of those who promote such things with the actual thing, any
more than we should confuse “Christian” evangelists that promote and covet money and wealth
while pretending to promote the Word of God as holy men. And I personally guarantee that every
single self-proclaimed anarchist you will ever meet is so in name only for false show, each using
driver’s licenses, surnames, employment titles, consumer protections, and social security numbers
of the very government they claim to despise; slaves to their own ignorance of Source and merely
worshipers of money (mammon). In this way, “Anarchists” are not too far off from legal Christians.
Without a government to rally against, the anarchist has no purpose, for his purpose is the end of
all notions of governed law. And so with some hilarity the very false existence of the ßatteringly
titled “anarchist” depends upon some government’s existence, and more to the point that he is a
member of that government. In other words, it’s a controlled opposition replete with music, cloth-
ing, poetic musings, and sellable counter-culture with billions in sales. It is commercially speaking
the anti-patriot. It is yet another unnatural trap.

Ironically, the anarchist either has no clue or ignores the fact that he could quit volunteering to be a
part of the government he rails against at any time, even as he promotes a “voluntary society”
outside of it. Of course this notion of a “voluntary society” is just a reference to another form of
government, for as history shows, the anarchist leaders always become the communal government
they pretend to hate so as to enforce their own version of volunteerism through violent force. In-
stead, the so-called ÒanarchistÓ continues to use greedily all of the beneÞts government provides

!251
his Þctional persona in citizenship and in marriage, and especially that perceived freedom of
speech that allows him to proclaim his imagined anarchy even while acting as a citizen-ship of
government. Without even realizing it, the anarchist lives by the license (permission) of govern-
ment, which is only organized anarchy to begin with. Anarchists have license (permission) to pre-
tend anarchy by the very government they pretend to oppose. And so ultimately he rallies against
nothing but the inevitable fruit of his own desires, for his desires can only lead to the same or
worse tyranny he currently wishes to escape. This can go nowhere. This is circular madness, which
is why revolution is a synonym of anarchy; to revolve into the same old anarchical system of a new
govern-ment under a different name. An anarchistÕs existence is literally interdependent on govern-
ment. Without government, the position or title of anarchist would be pointless. Once in an actual
state of anarchy, with no established law and governmental protections for his anarchical behavior
and no police of government to protect his rallies, he would then need to become some-thing other
than an anarchist, for his goal would have been in his mind apparently attained. But what could he
really become but a dictator or a subject thereof, a governor or one of the governed, an employer or
an employee, a master or a slave? The notion of anarchy is but a circular controlled opposition that
will never succeed in anything but continued ignorance and misunderstanding of the Source of all
Law. For anarchy is only the religion of lawlessness (Godlessness).

And here we arrive at the notion of do no harm.

The Real question is, how can one have freedom or exemption from injury, unless that word
ÒinjuryÓ legally means something other than actual harm in Nature? Well, I hate to break it to you,
but exemption from injury really means licensed exemption from law. To injure something or some-
one is to bring it into and under the authority and jurisdiction of the law. In-jure; Latin injuria;
meaning in right. To bring a person or thing into artiÞcial law where ÒrightsÓ pretend to exist. If one
man can cause an in-jury to another, it is only because the law recognizes this as a fact, because the
law recognizes the person of the man has been harmed. And in court, something is only an injury if
the court says its an injury Ñ not the written law, but only the determination and opinion of the
judge (god).

The legal license government bestows upon its own Þctional, legal personas and titles is the right to
commit crimes without injury; without those crimes being punishable by law. This is exemption. It
is not exemption from being harmed, only exemption from the law recognizing what in Reality is
harm compared to the legal version and corruption of the Nature of artiÞcial Òharm.Ó The gods
decide what constitutes harm, and for that matter murder and rape. One without ability to cause
injury because no law declares such crime is an injury, as one immune from injury by licensed
permission to commit the crime, is one whoÕs actions are not bound by or punishable by the legal
law, and one who cares not of the Law of God. This state of impunity can only exist in the legal
name and its legal realm (jurisdiction), in the character of legal personhood. It does not Exist in
Nature.

How long can man continue in his legally permitted actions against GodÕs Nature while pretending
that those governmentally sanctioned actions will not destroy his very own place of actual
Existence under God? How long can doctors kill while acting in the legally protected and insured
status of their titled character for proÞt without being responsible for their own actions as men of
God? In Reality (before God), this Þctional notion of legal impunity does not change the actual
Nature of the effect of his actions into anything less harmful to his Environment and the Life
(Creation) within. Indeed, his judgement and punishment is manifesting all around him, even as he
legally (in persona) pretends to ignore the warnings and consequences of and to Jehovah while
they continuously manifest in the obviously diseased state of most common men. ManÕs True
judgement by God may and perhaps should very well be his own undoing and erasure from this
Permanence of Being by his own Þctional designs and licenses against IT.

If God were a land-Lord, man would have been evicted last century!

!252
But God Is all of Creation and Nature, a state of Pure Harmony of Design, and so the eviction
through extinction will only come when that Harmonious Perfection of Nature’s Design is polluted
and altered by Þctional discord just enough to cause manÕs demiseÉ along with everything he
takes with him as collateral damage. That is, unless man wakes up to his own illusions; a task self-
assigned to myself and as the purpose and intent of this exhaustive work.

Most important to this revelation, we must remember that while Nature Exists despite man and his
doctrines, manÕs Þction must always and without exception have its foundation upon the back of
Mother Nature even while denying It. In other words, the Supremacy of Permanent Being that is
called as “God” and that is “Jehovah” is always the foundational precept of all man’s legal law.
This is to say that in order to stand against God in the artiÞce of legal name and title (citizenship),
the acknowledgement of that Supreme “God” must also exist therein, for there would be no need
for Þctional considerations unless Reality Þrstly (originally) and in Permanence Exists (I AM). More
to the point, this means that God’s Law (the Natural Law) is always foundational and thus
Supreme over all of man’s legal laws and designs. Source, Origin, is always most powerful and
never changes. Jehovah, as is scripturally written, never leaves man’s side, for man is an in-
separable part of Jehovah. Man must choose to purposefully, willfully ignore God and that
Supreme Law for man’s designs to become a virtual reality. But this participation in legal things
does not nor can it ever kill God’s Permanence of Existence as Nature, for that would be an
oxymoronic impossibility, as man’s legal law cannot exist without man’s state of Being (Life) under
God in Nature. Therefore legal law can only be circular in its own false nature; a closed-loop
system with no afÞliation to Jehovah, and one that exists only inside of God, never outside. It is
therefore always inferior to God’s Law, for man can never travel outside of God’s Creation, but
instead only pretend it does not Exist. Life and therefore consciousness of Jehovah must Þrst exist
as a foundation for ideas and Þctions of law to subsequently exist and be put forth from that
Creation of Life. Without Life (Jehovah), there would be no purpose or capacity for spiritual death
(legal personhood and citizenship). Spirituality is Source. God’s Law is as Permanent in Its Being as
Being Itself is Permanent, while man’s legal realm merely rises and falls with each new, petty,
always temporary empire built upon the foundation of God’s Creation, stripping it of all that is
holy and sacred. In this way man is, in his limited experience and consideration, merely a
temporary ßea upon a never-ending dog.

But I happen to believe we can be so much moreÉ

Please note that these are not merely the opinions of this author, but are considered as the very
foundation of manÕs law in all of its principles (maxims) and deÞnitions. For the legal law to have
authority, this Superior (Higher) and Supreme Law must Þrst be acknowledged as Source, and
then subsequently and voluntarily separated, overruled, and willfully ignored in lieu of that legal
Þction. This is alienation. For this to happen, voluntary consent must be garnered through trickery
and artiÞce, usually by some form of contract, to byfollow blindly
all of us manÕs
to follow legal manÕs
blindly opinions instead
legal of
opinions
God’s
insteadNatural,
of God’sPermanent Law. But man
Natural, Permanent Law.always
But man hasalways
a choice.
hasHe may ask
a choice. Heeither
may what is Right,
ask either whatoris
what
Right,isorlegal.
whatBut sadlyBut
is legal. he tends
sadly to
hefollow thefollow
tends to easiest,
thethough
easiest,not the correct
though path.
not the correct path.

This work is dedicated to the dream that all good and conscious men will one day realize and Live
by the correct choice, before ignorance of that Supreme Law and man’s poor legal choices destroy
his ability to choose; before his choices destroy his own state in that Permanence of Being. The
Existence of man is only as temporary as his choices make him.

In the Bible, a similar plea as mine own was made to those whom, on the streets of Athens, were
praying upon alters to inconceivable, ÒunknownÓ gods, much as corporate ÒChristiansÓ do todayÉ

—=—

“For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar wherein
was written, UNTO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom ye then ignorantly

!253
 worship, him show I unto you. God that made the world, and all things
that are therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, DWELLETH
NOT IN TEMPLES MADE WITH HANDS. Neither is worshipped with
men’s hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he giveth to all life
and breath and all things, AND HATH MADE OF ONE BLOOD ALL
MANKIND, to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath assigned the
seasons which were ordained before, and the bounds of their
habitation, That they should seek the Lord, if so be they might have
groped after him, and found him, though doubtless he be not far from
every one of us. FOR IN HIM WE LIVE, AND MOVE, AND HAVE
OUR BEING, as also certain of your own Poets have said: For we are
also his generation. Forasmuch then, as WE ARE THE GENERATION
OF GOD, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or
silver, or stone GRAVEN BY ART AND THE INVENTION OF MAN.”
—Acts 17: 23-29, 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)

—=—

As God Is and includes each of us, therefore all past, present, and future “generations” are the
generation (creation) of God. For to generate is to create! This would be the most simple and self-
evident of under-standings, were it not for the serpentine tongues of those who wish to deceive
through the artiÞce and spelling of legal Þction. For man too generates legal, Þctional things, and we
may be fooled that such men are therefore gods of their own creation.

GENERATION - noun - The act of begetting; procreation, as of animals. 1. Production;

FORMATION; as the generation of sounds or of curves or equations. 2. A SINGLE
SUCCESSION IN NATURAL DESCENT, AS THE CHILDREN OF THE SAME PARENTS;
hence, AN AGE. Thus we say, the third, the fourth, or the tenth generation. Genesis 15:16. 3.
The people of the same period, or living at the same time. O faithless and perverse generation.
Luke 9:41. 4. GENEALOGY; a series of children or descendants FROM THE SAME STOCK.
This is the book of the generations of Adam. Genesis 5:1. 5. A FAMILY; A RACE. 6.
PROGENY; OFFSPRING. (Webs1828)

—=—

If God made all men of the same blood, why do we respect the bloodlines of royalty and nobility?
Why are these considered as separate lines? Only through the artiÞce of legal Þction can these
fabled genealogies be respected. Unfortunately, we must face reality, which is that all nations are
only protectors of the bloodlines of the gods. The citizens of the nations are not the creators of
them, for all nations are created only to protect the blood posterity of their creators. This will be
totally explained as we proceed in this work.

How shall we overcome this magical spell of word-enchantment and deceit so that even our own
place in Jehovah can become our conscious Reality both in sense and in conscious Life? We must
of course remove the mystery of the language arts by deciphering the codes that bind us in
artiÞce.

MYSTERY - A trade, ART, or occupation. Masters frequently bind themselves in the

indentures with their apprentices to teach them their art, trade, and mystery. (Black4)

!254
 MYSTIC - In Louisiana, a "mystic testament" is A WILL UNDER SEAL. (WCA1889)

—=—

Join me now on a journey into the realm of legal Þction, where Reality certainly remains in Its
occulted Permanence of Being, but is imaginarily extinguished and re-named within a language
designed to cause men to be its artiÞcial gods, a language with roots unlearned and ignored by its
professors and subjects despite being the backbone and force of the false law of men and kings that
rule us all through their false impersonations; the graven art forms that are the invention of man’s
anfractuous (twisted) mind.

It’s time for you to meet your strawman…


!255
 —=—

Chapter 2:

The Ego As Identity: 

A Persona Of The Mind

—=—

—=—

STRAMINEUS HOMO:


“Latin. A MAN OF STRAW, one of NO SUBSTANCE, 

put forward as BAIL OR SURETY.”
ÑBlackÕs Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, deÞnition of STRAMINEUS HOMO

—=—

Words are the DNA sequence chain of the legal system.

Like the familiar double helix symbology, each word-stem connects to all others within a coded
mathematical circuit, adding up to a unique or novel expressive trait that is at the same time
predictable by its practitioners, subtly alterable at any time to suit their needs and designs, and yet
generally hidden from the comprehension of their multitude of victims. Innumerable variations of
the legal DNA word-code are thus possible; each word chain re-presenting a subject-matter in some
new mutation of artiÞcial life. Like geneticists, scribes and lawyers attach and detach sufÞxes, pre-
Þxes, pre-positions and pro-positions with surgical precision to create new and ever more ominous
combinations, mixing ancient Latin and Greek roots transcribed into genetically altered, sequential
chains in order to form and redeÞne man and indeed Nature Itself as something other than a
wondrous, sentient, self-existent and Living part of all Being.

This is the alchemy of word magic; a conspiracy by words to separate and abstract the individual
parts from the power of their whole (Source). These linguistic fabricators literally cast out-loud and
in-writing their wordsmith spells, sequencing out each individual man (homo; male or female) with
proper names, phrases, insurable numbered sequences, and ßattering titles that re-present us all into
a Þctional form of man with no recognized substance or soul. These spells literally create in the mind
an artiÞcial persona; a Þctional character put forward for legal purposes under bonded indebted-
ness and in the invisible chains of surety, sometimes referred to as a “strawman.”

!256
Language comprehension through word dissection is the only scientiÞc method available for
discovery of this legal treachery, for words and the viral ideas they spread like disease do not
appear under any microscope. No brain surgeon can cure their effect. No radiation can eradicate
them. Words are intrinsic yet invisible splinters causing an inward infection that alters the mindÕs
perception of all that is Reality. Only conscious knowledge of the power and intention behind these
words can protect us from their effect upon our mind, body, and soul.

—=—

“A man's manners are a mirror in which he shows his portrait.”

—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

Standing before the looking glass, we believe that what we see accurately displays what others will
see as our pretended selves, our projected self-image, while inherently knowing that such a re-
versed mirror image of ourselves is always backward, and never a True re-presentation of even our
own Nature in Reality. We hide within this false, empty appearance and its name and reputation. For
the mirror shows merely our form, but never the substance of what lies beneath that image of ßesh
and behind those two-dimensionally reßected eyes. That third dimension that gives Life to the
Source of the image, Nature Itself, is missing. The blood and the soul are hidden, our delusional
appearance being only skin deep even as it appears to gaze emptily back at us. In Reality we Live,
but the Þctional image looking back at ourselves from that mirror shows only the artiÞce of evil (live
backwards), anti-Life, a false image re-presenting merely the Þctional form of Life but never the
force of Life in and of Itself. The reßective form in the mirror simply has no power to effect Reality
without its controlling Source. Man must control this false persona, this empty form, being at all
times aware of the difference between Reality and Its Þctional representation, lest that empty shade
be used to magically control one's True Self through some adversarial design.

The legal systemÕs sole purpose is to harness that form without substance into a Þctional entity
called a person (status), while tricking all men into acting only in that vain and empty image, and
never as our True Selves. In this way men are controlled utterly by their own false impressions of
themselves. Our Lives are stripped from the timeless Nature of GodÕs Realm and placed into a
streaming, calendric history as this Þctional legal persona (as property of the state) is tracked, its
every action recorded as a history of commercially driven events from its birth to its death. For
today we carry our mirrors with us, their modern surfaces having become transmuted through
technology (art) into interactive touch-screens that can Þt into our pocket or be worn around our
wrists as the tracking marks of foolish, public-minded beasts.

—=—

“There exists, for everyone, a sentence — A SERIES OF WORDS — that

has the power to destroy you. Another sentence exists, ANOTHER
SERIES OF WORDS, that could heal you. If you're lucky you will get
the second, but you can be certain of getting the Þrst.”


―Philip K. Dick, quoted from: ‘VALIS’

—=—

Within the legal system of language arts, all of Nature is re-presented in form and therefore only in
some empty name (noun). The image (form) in the mirror can never escape that artiÞcial realm,
trapped behind an invisible, legal bar (barrier), existing only as a legal reßection of Nature but

!257
never as the Reality of Nature Itself. It is man framed into seemingly living art. If the mirror breaks
into a million pieces, the substance of the Reality as Source in Nature still remains whole despite its
broken appearance within those many shards. The false reßection (re-presentation) may change, but
Reality remains intact despite that re-presentation. The reßection (appearance) simply cannot exist
without the Reality of its Source. If one looks only at the form shattered into a million pieces of
glass, one might believe the actual Reality of even one's own Source to be destroyed, though it may
be right in front of or behind their own face and standing quite intact. Likewise, if the Þctional,
legally created persona (strawman) is broken or declared as legally, civilly dead, the man feels no
pain upon the ßesh of his Real body, and the presence of his soul is untouched within. Only the
straw is broken.

However, such an illusion may certainly trick the man into believing (loving) that it is indeed he or
she that is actually broken in Reality, and not merely that which Þctionally re-presents Reality in
the artiÞce. This is the power of respecting art over its Source.

Man -vs- person.

Nature -vs- art.

Reality -vs- Þction.

Live -vs- eviL.

The duality of what is evil (artiÞcial) can only be seen from the imagination of the beholder. Art is
not evil in and of itself, of course, but belief in (love) and respect of that art over the Reality it re-
presents lies at the root of the evils that most men do. For the art can never actually replace or
improve upon the Source. This is the self-evident Law of Nature. And beatiÞcation alone is
certainly not improvement, merely empty show, an intrusion upon Nature’s Perfection of Design,
where all things (all Creation) are Equal (priceless). And so to the perceptions and deÞnitions of
anything falsely existing in evil (against the Reality and ÒgoodÓ Design of Nature), anything good
and wholesome would be reßectively evil to that which exists only in the appearance of an evil
(artiÞcial) form. ArtiÞce (evil) opposes Life, seeing in its own warped disposition Nature (Source)
Itself as the true evil, Life being wholly anti-art. ArtiÞciality (art) is always opposed to the Reality it
re-presents as purely an empty but often captivating and even convincing image. Lies often appear
to be or are sold as better than the Reality they simulate. And even man's law may carry the
appearance of good in its artiÞce (evil) at times. But legal law (the law of artiÞcial things) is always
opposed to NatureÕs Law (the True Law of Life), no exceptions, for its very legal existence would be
redundant without such an oppositional quality. It would simply serve no purpose if it were in
harmony with the Law of all Source, which it absolutely cannot be as the law of only artiÞce. What
is satanic (adversarial) must have an opposing object or subject to stand against, otherwise its
reason for existence is pointless. Thus we must always remember that a person-hood (legal status) is
always opposed to the Living man it is attached to in surety, being merely a legal standing in some
Þctional jurisdiction and false history; a reßective re-presentation of Life by a Lifeless image built
solely upon words (art) on paper. These are the fragile but bonding chains of straw.

—=—

“What is like is not the same; for NOTHING SIMILAR IS THE SAME.”
—A Latin maxim of law: Talis non est eadem; nam nullum simile est idem. 4 Coke, 18. (Black4)

—=—

All words must be considered and expressed according to their artful source; as either the
descriptive substance of something actually happening in Reality or as a mere ÒartiÞcialÓ form of
an invented yet accepted and conÞrmed falsehood. This is to say that if the devil speaks, his words

!258
will always be a sincere lie. Its words will be in the form of a binding contract regarding another’s
“property,” and never in respect of any Free Creation in Nature. Likewise, when a man acting in
the ofÞce of attorney (agent of the Þction) speaks, he must use only the words and terms of his
commercial profession (art) as an ofÞcer (demon) of the court (jurisdiction of what is satanic), for
the ability to hold such a ßattering title in name only requires adherence to those limited terms of
art (the devilÕs legal language) as the authoritative form of communication (commerce) under a
contract of subjective intercourse. The demon (advocate for the devil) can only exist in the devil’s
jurisdiction of a debtorÕs hell, and he who signs or is bound under contract is always a debtor,
owing performance to the owner of the terms of that contractual relationship. Only a Pure and
unblemished man without legal (false) name and title or other legal status (persona) has leave
under God to Live and speak Freely and in perfect honesty at all times in the Reality of all things,
for only a man free of legal Þction and artiÞce (evils) may always Live in the Truth and Law of the
Reality of all things, in the ever-occurring Design of the constant Force of Life that is Creation.
Either a man Lives by his word by the Word (Law/Son) of God or he will certainly and in due
course become bound by the contractual words of another. The second any man respects any
person, for instance, he has broken the Highest Word of God and thus stands in evil (artiÞciality)
opposed to It. For a contract made of the legalese words of men requires some legal person (Þction
of law) that is also created by men for those legal words to be binding. For the use of a legal sig-
nature (impersonation) shows the sign of legal intent, the intent to be bound by a law that is anti-
christ. This Purity of intent by men without degradation or blemish (mark) is the only actual,
sensual Life of Truth, a Being based only on and in the Reality of our very own Nature and Source.
It is the ultimate Trust (Faith). This is the True Realm of God, from which the whole of the Law and
Laws of Nature is rooted and unshakable. All else is obviously the temporary art forms and words
of man.

As we deÞne terms throughout this work, the reader must at all times remember this notion of
clearly having the proper perspective; that Source is always opposed to image, no matter how
similar in appearance any symbology and representation of the Real may be made to appear. For
every word may take upon itself its opposite, mirror (evil) reßection, depending solely upon the
disposition of the speaker of that word of art. In other words, he or it with the power to deÞne and
redeÞne terms, even against the very Nature of that to which any word is attached, controls the
minds and therefore the actions of others. The artist controls his art, the cartoonist his cartoon, the
government its persons as the creator gods of such Þctional creations. It is the lack of knowledge of
these alternative, legal deÞnitions of words that causes men to be controlled by those words, for
legality is opposed to Reality (Jehovah). Like a virtual computer simulation, men are controlled
only through ignorance of the coded language matrix that controls their persona (image), even as
they speak those dualistic words without knowing their alternative and ofÞcial (spoken in ofÞce/
false persona) meaning.

And so evil, from evilÕs perspective, is good. The victim of evil must Þrst be able to empathize with
evil so as to comprehend its designs, and only then may one avoid its legal trickery and heal one's
True Self of such evil intent and afßiction. Only by uncovering evil can good be seen, as light
uncovers the perceived mysteries that lay beneath the false covering of darkness. What is seen in
the light (knowledge) is Truth, and only darkness (ignorance) may cover it up. But knowledge of
false things, as an addicting appreciation for the comforts of the arts (lies), can only lead yet again
into the darkness. And so we must from this point on know and accept that every word is steeped
in duality — that the legal version is never the same as the general, literal, or Real meaning, at best
standing only in a similitude in phonetic quality and appearance. But similitude is never sameness,
and so the legal language and that of the names (nouns) it claims propriety over should never be
confused to be the same as our common (non-legal) or Natural one, though it may sound and be
pronounced in perfect similitude (sounding in exact sameness like a mirror image, but existing only
in similarity, never in sameness). For the light may never co-exist with the dark, where even the
lightest shade of that darkness may blur the Truth and cause the most devastatingly false imagery.
Legal words are in a continuous battle with their general counterparts, just as evil (the dead copy)
is always against that which is good (the Living Source).

!259
 EVIL - noun - Evil is natural or moral. Natural evil is any thing which produces pain, distress,
loss or calamity, or which in any way disturbs the peace, impairs the happiness, or
DESTROYS THE PERFECTION OF NATURAL BEINGS. Moral evil is any deviation of a
moral AGENT from the rules of conduct prescribed to him BY GOD, OR BY LEGITIMATE
HUMAN AUTHORITY; or it is any violation of the plain principles of justice and rectitude.
There are also evils called CIVIL, which affect injuriously the peace or prosperity of A CITY
OR STATE; and POLITICAL EVILS, which INJURE A NATION, IN ITS PUBLIC
CAPACITY. All wickedness, all crimes, ALL VIOLATIONS OF LAW AND RIGHT ARE
MORAL EVILS. Diseases are natural evils, but they often proceed from moral evils. 2.
Misfortune; mischief; injury. There shall no evil befall thee. Psalms 91:10. A prudent man
foreseeth the evil and hideth himself. Proverbs 22:3. 3. Depravity; corruption of heart, or
DISPOSITION to commit wickedness; malignity. (Webs1828)

EVIL - It is an "evil" within rule that either means or end of conspiracy must be evil, to
frustrate or impede a government function, WHETHER THAT FUNCTION IS
PERFORMED UNDER A CONSTITUTIONAL OR AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW.
(Black4)

—=—

The Þrst comprehension that the reader should obtain within these schizophrenic deÞnitions of the
word evil is that of a speciÞc duality between God (Jehovah) and man acting in the ofÞce of a legal
god (ecclesia), creating in this word a split personality based on the perspective of the user.
Obviously, in consideration of the disposition of any artiÞcial, legally Òconstituted,Ó established
and ordained government, morality through GodÕs Natural Law is opposite to and therefore evil in
its consideration by that government. The strict legal law makes absolutely no allowance for
conscious, moral actions against its structural integrity of strictly written ÒpositiveÓ law: a
foundation of purely false, legal words, fraudulent representations, and utter deceit (as Þction of
law). GodÕs Law of Nature alone rules over man, while manÕs invention of legal law alone rules
over persons (legal status). The creator controls…

To be clear, if government is criminal in its actions even against its own written (constituted) intent,
it will still always consider it an Òevil actÓ for any man to attempt to thwart its organized criminal,
Òlegalized,Ó commercially licensed actions, no matter how offensive it may be towards GodÕs
Nature and Law or even to its own stated purpose. For its power and authority may only exist
through contract law, the law of man's artfully created words. That which has its foundation in lies
(words) can never be trusted.

LetÕs be clear here that there are only two ways to enslave a manÉ by unrestrained use of force or
by the force of law under free and voluntary contract. The legal devils of the nations are bound by
the second option, using force only by the authority of permissive word magic to ÒprotectÓ the
person already in contractual obligation. The mob protects its victims in a similar fashion as
govern-ment, exacting proÞts in exchange for security and a stay of execution. The difference? The
government protects its own person (property) and extorts for that protection, while the mob
ignores the rights of the government-granted persona (status) and protects the man while extorting
him. This is why organized crime moved into government, to make their extortion racket legal.

There is a Þne line between protecting legal property called as citizen-ships and guarding over the
property of prisoners.

PROTECT - verb transitive - [Latin protectus, protego; pro and tego; to cover; Gr. with a preÞx;
Eng. deck. See Deck.] To cover or shield from danger or injury; to defend; TO GUARD; to
preserve in safety; a word of general import both in a literal and Þgurative sense. Walls
protect a city or garrison; clothing is designed to protect the body from cold; arms may protect
one from an assault; our houses protect us from the inclemencies of the weather; THE LAW
PROTECTS OUR PERSONS AND PROPERTY; the father protects his children, and THE

!260
 GUARDIAN HIS WARD; a shade protects us from extreme heat; A NAVY PROTECTS OUR
COMMERCE and our shores; EMBASSADORS ARE PROTECTED FROM ARREST.
(Webs1828)

—=—

One would be hard pressed to read this deÞnition and not recognize the very designs of organized
crime, remembering that danger means the jurisdiction of the state or king, and that protection from
in-jury within that danger is payed for by taxation, fees, and other exactions. It is merely the source
of evil protecting us from its own evils (agents). Amazing what a bit of perspective can doÉ

We must remember above all else not to anthropomorphize a nation (artiÞcial person) and its
government agents (principal ofÞcers) within our minds into something that feels pain or that can
actually be harmed in Nature (Reality). A nation is not Natural, not born from Nature, not a
Creation of the Supreme Creator of Life. Something artiÞcial cannot feel anything. It is only manÕs
personal (incorporated) identiÞcation and false empathy towards and as a personiÞed part and
stakeholder of that artiÞcial construct (matrix) of manÕs legal creation and artful law that allows
such a nation (as an artiÞcial person) to punish men for somehow harming that artiÞcial creation of
man or one of its commercial agencies. To apply human emotions and qualities found only in
GodÕs Creation of Nature to a corporation (government or religion) is to abandon GodÕs Nature
and Law and to respect Þctional persons and ßattering titles. Belief in (love of) Þction is a sign of
abandonment of God and Its Law. This is also fallaciously known as a victimless crime, a crime
against the legally contracted Þction (deceit) that is the Þctional person (false creation) of Ògovern-
ment.Ó We are all victims by virtue of our legal birth and the respect we give to that identity as Real
(of God), for person-hood is certainly a dis-ease, and we contract that disease by the conÞrmation
and respect of its person (status) in society and under its law and legal sanction (force and
punishment).

In addendum, let us be clear here that love is synonymous with hate (but not the same), and so be
it love, hate, or any other emotional state of being we may manifest in ourselves towards Þctional,
artiÞcial things is still a show of be-lief and thus respect. The devil cares not which one of these
cause you to respect its evils, for all of these emotional states may lead to the same effect and
contractual relationship in mammon. To hate anything requires Þrst a belief in the truth and
veracity or authority of that thing. To hate a Òpolice ofÞcerÓ is to hate a Þctional, ßattering title that
means nothing in Reality, pretending the actions of the title are not actually the actions of the man.

—=—

“Then Jesus said to His disciples, “IF ANYONE DESIRES TO COME

AFTER ME, LET HIM DENY HIMSELF, and take up his cross, AND
FOLLOW ME.”
—Matthew 16:24, KJB

—=—

Here we Þnd the notion of a man denying himself. But why would christ suggest that we should
deny our own Existence unless some other Þgurative meaning was intended? The word himself, as
used above, is explained in Strong's #G1438 (heautou) as one's own conceits, and generally as a
third person. ThayerÕs Greek Lexicon deÞnes himself (heautou) as a: ÒÉreßexive pronoun OF THE
3RD PERSON. It is used of the 3rd person singular and plural, to denote that THE AGENT AND
THE PERSON ACTED ON ARE THE SAMEÉ TO COME TO ONE’S SELF, TO A BETTER
MINDÉ IN HIS OWN MIND, etc.Ó And, Òit serves as reßexive also to the 1st and 2nd person, as
often in the classic Greek, WHEN NO AMBIGUITY IS THEREBY OCCASIONEDÉÓ

!261
Over and over we Þnd our knowledge and foundational structure thereof to be increased on this
subject, that the man is always responsible for everything he does in Life, no matter what agency
relationship he may pretend as an excuse for his actions. The Highest moral Law cannot be
thwarted, even by the most impressive marks of Þctional personhood and legal licensure. And here
again we see that ambiguity must remain intact, lest property in words consume us. The name and
title does not make the man, for to believe so is to deny oneÕs Maker, oneÕs Nature and True Source.

And this is also why the spiritual goal of complete forgiveness for all men is key to defeating such
evils. Forgiveness requires nothing but the purposeful and outright dismissal of the power of any
act or its intent. It is to respect only the Truth, that there is no “spoon,Ó and that men often act badly
because they believe in the ÒspoonÓ over the Reality that name represents. Real problems cannot be
solved by Þctional methodologies, and so it does no man any good to sue or be sued in that system
of mammon for Þctional crimes against Þctional persons and things. A manÕs crimes are always his
own before God, not his pretended 3rd person, and so he should not be judged by any other man
nor by that false persona as a legal excuse. For if all men are Created Equal under God, then no
man can possibly be a judge (god) but by artiÞcial means against the Design of Jehovah. One can-
not claim such Natural equality and then shit all over it through legal means by disrespecting that
equality in any other man, for we may only invoke such super-natural power to cause another to be
injured and judged by men if we act against the Law of Nature by respecting not only the ßattering
title of Òjudge,Ó but also the Þctional persons of all involved. We may only have one master, one
God, and this Highest of all Laws especially must be upheld as True. To Live a Spiritual Life is not
easy, requiring reason and conscious effort at all times never to invoke the demons of that legal
Þction in hell. For the only reward for such behavioral evil will only ever be in the debtorÕs hell of
mammon, and we must Þrst damn our own soul in order to force another to be damned in injury
under those false gods and their laws.

We sacriÞce our privacy and moral law to become and act as public citizen-ships (legal vessels) of
the gods of the state (district). So, is it correct to declare that there are indeed victimless crimes? No,
absolutely not! The victim is he or that which was sacriÞced. Our problem is that at some point the
sacriÞcial lamb became all of us, and the rite of sacriÞce became the birth of a dead entity known as
our id-entity, the strawman. In other words, the sacriÞce of all common men happens legally and
thus metaphorically at the registration and surnaming of our Þctional persona, when our Living,
vital statistics are magically transmuted into a Þctional persona (mask) existing only on paper and
our inheritable blood is Þguratively corrupted. Victimhood is a lifestyle based on a registered legal
event that happened long before we could possibly be consciously aware of our own choice; one
made for us by our completely ignorant parents who just happen to be as equally victimized as we
were made to be by them. They habitually and by the custom of their own enslavement offer their
own children up as a sacriÞce to the legal gods of the nations, usually without knowledge (with
voluntary ignorance) of the consequences of their own actions. The citizen-ship created by birth is
the legal creation of a dead person, for all things of Þction are dead to GodÕs Nature of Creation.
This is to say that birth registration and certiÞcation is a sacriÞce (symbolic destruction) of the
consideration of what is the Living Source and Force of Life (the blood of man) and the power of
choice each man consciously has in lieu of this ceremonial creation of that spiritually dead, Þctional
persona that each man becomes surety for in the after-birth. The image is thus respected over the
Reality, the body Þguratively replaced by a vessel (ship) in commerce. We are metaphorically
sacriÞced to mammon at our legal birth. And yes, this is Þguratively a blood sacriÞce, for public
personhood is as an attainting and corruption of blood in the eyes of manÕs legalistic law. Our
blood inheritance, or in other words our ability to become ÒlegitimateÓ heirs of our True fore-
fathers, is sacriÞced, our entirety of Existence becoming as public servants in surety for anotherÕs (a
strangers) property (legal status). Thus, we are used and abused by the creator and master of our
unique, unambiguous strawman.

This will all become clear very soon, for a sacriÞce is only the loss of some thing to gain another
thing. We give up (sacriÞce) our Natural, unalienable, God-given rights in order to receive artiÞcial,
legal positive rights and protections from the gods and governors of the legal realm. And while our
initial sacriÞcial, public event of public birth was not our choice, and thus not enforceable by law,

!262
our continuous consent and speciÞcally our use of the signature, beneÞts, gains, and protections of
legal person-hood to the legal state (district) cause our victimhood to be voluntary. And so there are
no Truly victimless crimes when the man suffering the crime is doing so while acting voluntarily as
surety for anotherÕs property (person). Ignorance of the law that oneÕs legal persona (commercial
vessel) stands bound to certainly is no excuse under that same law, and voluntarily acting within
that legal persona in surety means his (manÕs) victimhood to such an artiÞce of words is voluntary.
Knowing the law is not a requirement for any man to act in surety under a vessel of that law. If this
were not legally true, then none of those end-user agreements we click on without reading from
Microsoft and other corporations would be invalid.
valid. It It
is is
notnot
thethe click
click ofof agreement
agreement that
that binds
binds usus
toto
such a unilaterally presumptive contract, but the actions we take as a user (third party) of that
product or legal entity attached to the person we are pretending to be. The contract is assumed to
be in effect by its use, and therefore so is the jurisdiction of law by which that contract was created
within and under. Again, our actions choose our god for us. Words only stand to solidify our choice
through legally binding contract.

Remember, do not shoot the messenger. The author is here only in the same capacity as the allegory
of christ was so written, not to judge you but to help save you from your own imagination and pre-
tended self-image, to keep you grounded in Reality. A matrix of word-spellings in legal code has
you, and only the knowledge of its design is offered here. You always have and must make your
own choice to be a victim or not, but you will always play the part of a victim without GodÕs Law
in strong foundation behind you and while acting under a proprietary commercial citizen-ship and
person-hood in surety for another (as the artiÞcial son of any nation/legal father). For every creator
stands in godship and thus lawmaker over its own creation and Þctional realm (legal jurisdiction).

VICTIM - noun - [Latin victima.] 1. A LIVING BEING SACRIFICED TO SOME DEITY, or in

the performance of a religious rite; usually, some beast slain in sacriÞce; BUT HUMAN
BEINGS HAVE BEEN SLAIN BY SOME NATIONS, for the purpose of APPEASING THE
WRATH or conciliating the favor of some deity. 2. Something destroyed; something
sacriÞced in the pursuit of an object. How many persons have fallen victims to jealousy, to
lust, to ambition! (Webs1828)

VICTIMIZE - verb transitive - TO SACRIFICE. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

SACRIFICE - verb transitive - sacÕriÞze. [Latin sacriÞco; sacer, sacred, and facio, to make.] 1. To
offer to God in homage or worship, by killing and consuming, as victims on an altar; to
immolate, either as an atonement for sin, OR TO PROCURE FAVOR, or to express
thankfulness; as, to sacriÞce an ox or a lamb. 2 Samuel 6:13. 2. TO DESTROY, SURRENDER
OR SUFFER TO BE LOST FOR THE SAKE OF OBTAINING SOMETHING; as, to sacriÞce
the peace of the church to a little vain curiosity. We should never sacriÞce health to pleasure,
NOR INTEGRITY TO FAME. 3. To devote with lossÉ 4. To destroy; to kill. - verb intransitive
- To make offerings to God by the slaughter and burning of victims, or of some part of them.
Exodus 3:18. - noun - [Latin sacriÞcium.] 1. An offering made to God by killing and burning
some animal upon an altar, as an acknowledgment of his power and providence, or to make
atonement for sin, appease his wrath or CONCILIATE HIS FAVOR, OR TO EXPRESS
THANKFULNESS FOR HIS BENEFITS. SacriÞces have been common to MOST NATIONS,
AND HAVE BEEN OFFERED TO FALSE GODS, as well as by the Israelites to Jehovah. A
sacriÞce differs from an oblation; the latter (oblation) being an offering of a thing entire or
without change, as tithes or Þrst fruits; whereas sacriÞce implies a destruction or killing, as
of a beast. SacriÞces are expiatory, impetratory, and eucharistical; that is, atoning for sin,
seeking favor, or expressing thanks. Human sacriÞces, the killing and offering of human
beings to deities, have been practiced by some barbarous nations. 2. THE THING OFFERED
TO GOD, or immolated by an act of religion...3. Destruction, surrender or loss made or
incurred for gaining some object, or for obliging another; AS THE SACRIFICE OF
INTEREST TO PLEASURE, or of pleasure to interest. 4. Any thing destroyed. (Webs1828)

—=—

!263
Of course, we must remember to perceive these words metaphorically here.

The sacriÞce of our privacy (blood right) is the sacriÞce of our blood inheritance and standing
interest to the land. Any public persona in a commercial citizen-ship under the systems (sovereign
nations) of mammon may only ever enjoy the pleasures of the land, but may never be the private,
responsible holder and disposer of that land, and may only be allowed in person (legal status/
class) to be the renter and temporary tenant thereof. This is our sacriÞce, for our public person-
hood is also our victim-hood.

This is the power of words in their descriptive capacity and perceived artful authority over Reality.
And so here we must pause to make known that it is not necessarily the lack of linguistic know-
ledge that is our collective problem. Anyone can pick up a dictionary just like anybody can pick up
a Bible or the legal statutes and public laws so as to learn them. There is no hidden language, for all
sources are available to be read and understood. Thus, there are no Real secrets. Any supposed
mysteries remain only due to a collective lack of due diligence and study of these words and their
origin by those who are the patient victims of these language arts; the citizenry of Þction. Ignorance
is never an excuse before God (Jehovah) or before manÕs law and magistrates (legal gods). Most of
us are so caught up in the busy-ness of employment (use as a tool/agent) that our time is spent
towards the pursuit of money in mammon, and so we have no time for the mastery of anything but
what our profession and legal lifestyle demands. Of course, this is the disposition and lame
justiÞcation of every slave that ever existed. Ignorance is a choice, just as citizenship is voluntary.

And so it is very important before we move on to identify this greatest of all illusions perpetrated
by these wordsmith scribes. For it is the English language itself that is the source of the cosmic,
legal joke that so makes us all the butt of their commercial entertainment. They donÕt just treat us
like dogs (pets), we willingly act the part under their offered contractual relationships.

—=—

“Laws penned with the utmost care and exactness, AND IN THE
VULGAR LANGUAGE, ARE OFTEN PERVERTED TO WRONG
MEANINGS; then why should we wonder that THE BIBLE IS SO?”
—Jonathan Swift, Thoughts On Various Subjects, Moral & Diverting

—=—

That most carefully penned work in all of history, the Bible, has been read and preached by billions
of men in this common, vulgar English (dog-Latin) tongue, and so its original intent has been
completely and utterly misunderstood by almost as many billions. This is an amazing
contemplation, that even those who have read and re-read the Bible multiple times cannot lay
claim to even the remotest mastery of its teachings, for its words are purposefully cyphered to be
indecipherable by the common, vulgar language of the lower and middle classes that make up the
multitude of the common, public (national) citizenships (subjects).

—=—

“English, as it is spoken, is a slave language.”

—Anonymous/unsourced, attributed to teachings in “sanskrit scholarship”

—=—

It would, of course, be fool-hearted for a master to teach his slaves to speak in the same
authoritative terms as he who seeks to exploit their very Nature and labor potential through their

!264
own ignorance. For the slaves would then Þnd the cure for their legal and spiritual disposition of
bondage, and would likely collectively destroy their masters for their trickery and abuse. We
would learn the Highest language, and so the Highest Law would become known (un-occulted) to
us, which, when properly used, always defeats any of manÕs artful additions to GodÕs Creation and
Word (Law).

Instead, they taught their pets to read and speak literal nonsense!

DOG-LATIN - The Latin of ILLITERATE PERSONS; Latin words put together on THE
ENGLISH GRAMMATICAL SYSTEM. (Black4)

LATIN - The language of the ancient Romans. There are three sorts of LAW LATIN: (1)
GOOD LATIN, allowed by the grammarians and lawyers; (2) FALSE OR INCONGRUOUS
LATIN, which in times past would abate original writs, though it would NOT MAKE VOID
any judicial writ, declaration, OR PLEA, etc.; (3) WORDS OF ART, KNOWN ONLY TO THE
SAGES OF THE LAW, AND NOT TO GRAMMARIANS, CALLED "LAWYERS'
LATIN."(Black4)

SCURRILOUS - The low and indecent language of the meaner sort of people, low indecency
or abuse; mean: foul: vile, SYNONYMOUS WITH VULGAR; foul or foul-mouthed. (Black4)

FOUL - adjective - 1. Covered with or containing EXTRANEOUS MATTER which is

INJURIOUS, noxious or OFFENSIVE; Þlthy; dirty; not clean; as a foul cloth; foul hands; a
foul chimney. My face is foul with weeping. Job 16:16. 2. Turbid; thick; muddy; as foul water; a
foul stream. 3. IMPURE; POLLUTED; as a foul mouth. 4. Impure; SCURRILOUS; OBSCENE
OR PROFANE; AS FOUL WORDS; FOUL LANGUAGE. 5. Cloudy and stormy; rainy or
tempestuous; as foul weather. 6. Impure; deÞling; as a foul disease. 7. Wicked; detestable;
abominable; as a foul deed; A FOUL SPIRIT. BABYLON - the hold of EVERY foul spirit.
Revelation 18:2. 8. Unfair; NOT HONEST; NOT LAWFUL or according to established rules
or customs; as foul play. 9. Hateful; ugly; loathsome. Hast thou forgot the foul witch Sycorax.
10. Disgraceful; shameful; as a foul defeat. Who Þrst seduced them to that foul revolt? 11.
Coarse; gross. They are all for rank and foul feeding. 12. Full of gross humors or impurities.
You perceive the body of our kingdom, how foul it is. 13. Full of weeds; as, the garden is very
foul. 14. AMONG SEAMEN, ENTANGLED; HINDERED FROM MOTION; OPPOSED TO
CLEAR; as, a rope is foul. 15. Covered with weeds or barnacles; as, the ship has a foul bottom.
16. Not fair; contrary; as a foul wind. 17. Not favorable or safe; DANGEROUS; as a foul road
or bay. 1. To fall foul is to rush on with haste, rough force and unseasonable violence. 2. To run
against; as, the ship fell foul of her consort. - verb transitive - TO MAKE FILTHY; TO DEFILE;
TO DAUB (MARK OR FLATTER); TO DIRTY; TO BEMIRE; TO SOIL; as, to foul the clothes;
to foul the face or hands. Ezekiel 34:18. (Webs1828)

—=—

Perhaps you should ask yourself: do you really think that you have any idea what ÒLawyerÕs
LatinÓ is composed of, as the terms and words of art spoken only in law society circles by these
legalistic Òsages of the lawÓ at bar? If grammarians arenÕt privy, what makes you think your
commonly taught, vulgar, Òfalse or incongruousÓ dog-Latin as the English language is sufÞcient to
decode such legalese?

Do the courts allow you to drivel on in such a vulgar tongue? Of course! You may plea to the gods
in whatever pet noises and grunts you wish to. A master always forgives his pets, live-stock, and
slaves for their inability to artfully and articulately speak the master-classes Higher language. After
all, this language differential is all that keeps these wordsmiths in power!

To be clear, illiteracy is not merely a lack of literacy. It can also be a sickness of such, a twisted
literacy in any subject, as a belief in knowledge of something that is in fact quite opposite or

!265
contrary to its True intent. If my literacy is ill, then I cannot be of right mind. If I attempt to either
understand the scriptures or understand the legal law without being literate in both, I will never be
literate in either. For what is law without a foundation, and what is the anti-law without something
to defeat and replace? If I teach my slave wrongly, on purpose, so that he may never Þnd the
literacy that would bring his Natural Freedom from me while under the magical nature of the
terms of art I use against him, and instead show him only the adversarial meanings of my own
invented vocabulary, then he will never be free. If I teach the literal meaning of a word, I cannot
also teach the Þgurative or metaphoric aspect of that same word. I cannot explain a forest without
Þrst teaching what a tree is. And I cannot compare anything to that forest poetically unless the
literal mechanics of growth for that forest are also a known entity. And if I create new words and
symbols known only to my own organized brotherhood in its society of crime and corruption, my
poetry, my verse, will have a source that is not literal in the Þrst place, and so remains lie built upon
a lie, the ultimate mystery. My slaves (denizens) then will never be able to read or write the legal or
Natural Law without understanding the opposition of each to each other, and so will never be able
to use my invented words against me, especially while acting in my proprietary persona (legal
status). For their whole Lives will be dedicated to supporting the very lies and fruitless labors (jobs)
that I have created to continue their enslavement. For all slaves are voluntarily so, whether they
know it or not.

This word foul will not be realized as to its full importance within the artiÞce of legal aesthetics;
that is it will not be comprehended by the reader how foul we have all been made in man’s legal
re-creation and entanglement through our Þctional person-hoods until perhaps the reader
progresses further into this work. The unenlightened man may never realize his own foul dis-
position until it is shown to him, so that he may wake up from his own imaginarily induced matrix
of artiÞce and oppression.

However, the foul man, with the meaning of not favorable or safe and dangerous is an important key
to public citizenship. For the Þctional ship we sail on this virtual sea of commerce causes our life
ad-venture (commercial journey) to require the contract of insurance (surety). The strawman is a
surety instrument insuring the surname as state property (a ship) in commerce, and thus bonding
the man to the Þctional character (persona/mask) that brings forth the mirror image while sup-
pressing the Natural Source.

While the so-called “dead,” pure form of the Latin language is an illustrative language, English
(dog-Latin) is indeed merely a descriptive language. When one literally describes anything, one is
committing to a re-presentation of that person, place or thing. When one illustrates anything, one
creates art, glorifying that person, place, or thing into that which it most certainly is not. In other
words, what is Real is cause to be illustrious, glorious, distinguished by pretended reputation of
greatness or eminence, which of course leads to the origin of the ßattering title, or title of honor.
Thus popes, kings, and other magistrates (gods) are illustrated with supposedly divine origins and
rights, and their bloodline is given as well to such illustration of honor and favor without works.

While the common multitude speaks generally and with most sincerely conscious and descriptive
words, the illustrious elite speak of all things in their illustrated, elevated, artful form. And so the
same word that is generally spoken in dog-Latin (English) carries a different intent and meaning
within the realms of the legal arts than in that common form. Is this not a magical trick of illusion?

—=—

"It is often forgotten that [dictionaries] are artiÞcial repositories, put

together well after the languages they deÞne. The roots of language are
IRRATIONAL and OF A MAGICAL NATURE."
—Jorge Luis Borges, Prologue to "El otro, el mismo."

—=—

!266
 —=—

“We have, as far as possible, closed every avenue by which light may
enter their (the slaves) minds. If we could EXTINGUISH THE
CAPACITY TO SEE THE LIGHT, our work would be complete; THEY
WOULD THEN BE ON A LEVEL WITH THE BEASTS OF THE FIELD
AND WE SHOULD BE SAFE. I am not certain that we would not do it,
if we could Þnd out the process and that on the plea of necessity.”
—Henry Berry, speaking of slavery in the Virginia House of Delegates in 1832, as excerpted from: “Brown America, The story of a New Race” by Edwin R.
Embree. 1931, The Viking Press.

—=—

But is this really possible: for each man to embrace and maintain a system of self-control (self-
government) and Livelihood without that legal Þction (lies)? Should we trust any and every man
just because he carries the marks and tokens of the govern-ment (mind control) that indicate some
calling or profession, as the illustration of man into legal personhood and ßattering title? Can I
trust a man who heals strictly by his own works, without his pretended character being legally
illustrated and artfully elevated into diplomatic, artiÞcial honors as a Òdoctor?Ó Is the power of
symbology, say the white coat and the staff of Hermes, so powerful that we should trust a man in
uniform without knowing a single thing about him, or perhaps because we trust in the for-proÞt
corporation (artiÞcial person) he works for in mammon while in an insured persona and ßattering
title? Does anyone stop to consider the reasons why ÒdoctorsÓ are required to carry the burden of
so much malpractice insurance, and that because of this insurance over bad/evil (mal/malice)
practice a doctor is not responsible for his own actions of harm against you? Why do you think
they are nicknamed as gods? Because these illustrious, legally titled, syndicalist ÒdoctorsÓ have No
Higher, moral Law above them! A doctor is after all created and bound only by the legal system
and laws of mammon because that title of ÒdoctorÓ does not Exist in Nature or under Its Law.
ÒDoctorsÓ are certainly not Creations of God. But neither is any other name or title we have been
entrained to blindly respect, including our own pretended ßatteries.

All men born perfect and untainted into Nature (Reality) at that very inception of Life and Blood
are Purely ambiguous and innocent as an unblemished soul, just as any random ant considered
within its willing work brigade goes unnamed and uncredited in its intent to beneÞt the whole
without artiÞce or fame. What are called as Òbirth defectsÓ are not defects of the child, but defects
resulting from the tainted parent(s), and generally this is due to the voluntary tainting of that
temple of God that is each individual mind, body, and soul of each man. For only manÕs arrogant
interference with the course and health of all that is in the harmony of Nature may cause Its Design
to temporarily fail.

The name and ßattering titles assigned as the artiÞcial legal ÒpersonÓ and ÒidentityÓ of any man
simply do not make the actual man. No one and no thing in Nature is Born (Created) with a name
(noun). Names are always empty without exception, a falsity re-presenting a Reality, and respect of
any name and/or title (nouns) over its True Source of the Reality of any thing in Nature, including
man in his works and actions (verbs), is adversarial to Life. Fiction vs. Reality.

ÒDoctors,Ó for example, donÕt Exist in Nature, being fully a legal concept of manÕs imagination and
artful design. Yet in that ßattering title the men who pretend legally to inhabit the title of ÒdoctorÓ
are publicly known to be the third leading causes of death in the United States, according to
statistics tallied by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in consideration of
death by iatrogenic (doctor/medicine-related) causes. But the privately held, actual statistics are
much worse when considering the iatrogenic (doctor-related/spread) cause of some of those other
leading causes of death, including cancers, unnaturally hardened cholesterol in strokes and heart

!267
attacks, and the spread of xenotransplanted, mis-folding prions through injectable so-called
“medicines.” Sadly, most of these seemingly mysterious diseases, which are mislabeled as
“dementias” like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, are in Reality caused by the direct injection
(vaccination), surgical transplantation, and inoculation of human and animal proteins (prions) and
DNA into the body, which by current estimates can lie dormant for up to Þfty years before
wreaking havoc upon the human and animal body infected by them. Often termed as “slow-
viruses,” these prion infections are only possible through a “doctor’s” legally licensed practice and
prescription (ad-vice), a license to kill without repercussion. Like a wasp that stings its prey, the
nurse inoculates its host by delivering the ingredients of a medical syringe, which directly bypasses
the body’s Natural defenses. Indeed, what has beed delivered and the damage done by it to all of
us in public victimhood is one of the greatest cover-ups in history.

And so here I offer the pieces of this puzzle. And with each piece Þt together, you will know the
True cause and agent of your own body’s dis-ease…

“Xenotransplantation is any procedure that involves the transplantation, implantation or

infusion into a human recipient of either (a) live cells, tissues, or organs FROM A
NONHUMAN ANIMAL SOURCE, or (b) HUMAN BODY FLUIDS, CELLS, TISSUES OR
ORGANS THAT HAVE HAD EX VIVO CONTACT WITH LIVE NONHUMAN ANIMAL
CELLS, TISSUES OR ORGANS…”

ÒAlthough the potential beneÞts are considerable, the use of xenotransplantation raises
concerns regarding the POTENTIAL INFECTION OF RECIPIENTS WITH BOTH
RECOGNIZED AND UNRECOGNIZED INFECTIOUS AGENTS AND THE POSSIBLE
SUBSEQUENT TRANSMISSION TO THEIR CLOSE CONTACTS AND INTO THE
GENERAL HUMAN POPULATION. Of public health concern is THE POTENTIAL FOR
CROSS-SPECIES INFECTION BY RETROVIRUSES, WHICH MAY BE LATENT AND
LEAD TO DISEASE YEARS AFTER INFECTION. Moreover, new infectious agents may not
be readily identiÞable with current techniques.”

ÑU.S. Food and Drug Administration website, entry deÞnition for ÔXenotransplantationÕ

—=—

This practice of “professionals” that profess their own expertise with an arrogance and protectional
syndicalism that can only be bought with money may only do so through the organized crime
(licensure) of government. They, by their prescriptions of such injections, have literally no
conscious or moral concept of the diseases they are spreading by breaking every Natural Law
known to man, the tainting of the Purity of the blood. This is the epitome of crimes against God’s
Nature.

And yet the ignorance of we, the victims of this medical and pharmaceutical corporate structure are
equally to blame, for even the inserted labels of these vaccinations and blood products using
animal and human cell substrates and serums warn of such resulting dis-ease states and of possible
death! Each class of this hierarchy, the doctor and the patient, are compartmentalized in their own
way, neither questioning each others authority, motive, or choice. And so the general population
has no idea that with every vaccine or other animal or human blood or tissue-based injectable
“medicine,” that they are being victimized and tainted through allo- (human) and xeno- (animal/
insect) transplantation.

Every vaccine created not only matches the above description, being grown on the cell substrates of
animals, but have the added moral storm of being grown on cloned human aborted fetal tissue.
This “practice” of modern “medicine” is literally a form of cannibalism, administered as a direct
bodily injection into the blood and muscle without the beneÞt of digestive barriers. Instead of
eating dead babies, we inject their DNA, protein, and essence directly into our own. To say this is
against every moral Law possible is certainly an understatement.

!268
 —=—

“Eaten blood is digested into its components so it ceases to be blood,

and the body re-uses the components for different things. Transfused
blood is NOT DIGESTED BUT FUNCTIONS AS BLOOD with all its
vital properties for life.”
—Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D., excerpt from an article entitled: “New England Journal of Medicine promotes anti-theism”

—=—

“For the LIFE of the ßesh is in the blood…”

—Leviticus 17: 11,14, KJB

—=—

In complete and purposeful ignorance of all moral law, the entirety of mankind has been
penetrated and impregnated with dormant (and sometimes active) prions that cause 100’s of
different manifestations of the same disease state. The blood serum of animals (and humans)
knowingly infected with possibly mis-folded prions is one of the most common ingredients in
many injectable drugs and vaccines. These infectious prions literally evolve (unfold) the host’s
healthy prions (speciÞc proteins) into a foreign form that causes disease and so-called Òdementia.Ó

What we are describing here is purposeful, man-made, unpredictable evolution. In other words, no
Act of God can cause this cross-species contamination that causes such infectious dis-ease. This gift
of chaos in the form of causal unfolding of our prion cells can only be prescribed and delivered by
compliant doctors and nurses.

EVOLUTION - noun - [Latin evolutio.] The act of UNFOLDING or unrolling. 1. A series of

things unrolled or UNFOLDED; as the evolution of ages… (Webs1828)

—=—

And so it is no wonder that Jonas Salk, creator of the injectable live-virus polio vaccine also wrote a
book with the title of ÒMan Unfolding,Ó where he states:

—=—

"The products of man's imagination and undisciplined appetite may

have a boomerang effect which in due time may well overpower him.”
—Jonas Salk, from ‘Man Unfolding’

—=—

And all of this because he who stings us with such a poison has a license and a white coat, a false
symbol of authority and pretended wisdom. For the doctor and scientist actually believe they may
somehow improve upon Nature’s Design, though they have no idea of its very Source or why it
Exists as Designed in the Þrst place. And from that collective, consensus-based imagination and the
arrogant, experimental works of it, that which is supposedly designed to heal instead carries the
design of utter harm, and often murder by injection. We are being evolved by modern medicine, a
concept that is hard to palate until the following evidence is revealed. This type of trust (blind
faith) in the false, empty, ßattering names and titles of menÕs personas (masks), from kings to

!269
priests to politicians, as well as the very history and sacrosanctity of Pure, untainted blood both
physically, spiritually, and in regard to inheritance law, is the very subject of this work.

This man-made disease state of all the goyim of the nations is the perfect example of trusting a man
not by his True Self and works but by respect of his name and ßattering titles. We trust a nurse to
sting us in ignorance, like a wasp stings its prey, with vaccines full of toxins and unÞltered animal
proteins, blood serums, and DNA particles that cause cascade reactions of the immune system.
Included in these well-documented but non-publicly disclosed “side-effects” are these purposefully
misdiagnosed, prion-related states of “dementia.”

—=—

ÒThe whole trend goes in a direction where a way will Þnally be found
TO VACCINATE BODIES so that these bodies WILL NOT ALLOW
THE INCLINATION TOWARDS SPIRITUAL IDEAS TO DEVELOP
and all their lives people will believe only in the physical world they
perceive with the senses… people are now vaccinated against
consumption, and in the same way they will be vaccinated against any
inclination towards spirituality…”

ÒA longing will arise (and become) general opinion: Whatever is

spiritual, whatever is of the spirit, is nonsense, is madness! Endeavours
to achieve this will be made by bringing out remedies to be
administered by inoculation just as inoculations have been developed
as a protection against diseases, only THESE INOCULATIONS WILL
INFLUENCE THE HUMAN BODY IN A WAY THAT WILL MAKE IT
REFUSE TO GIVE A HOME TO THE SPIRITUAL INCLINATIONS OF
THE SOUL. PEOPLE WILL BE INOCULATED AGAINST THE
INCLINATION TO ENTERTAIN SPIRITUAL IDEAS. Endeavours in
this direction will be made; inoculations will be tested that already in
childhood WILL MAKE PEOPLE LOSE ANY URGE FOR SPIRITUAL
LIFE.”
Ñ1) Rudolf Steiner: Fall of the Spirits of Darkness Lecture 13 ÒThe Fallen Spirits Inßuence in the World,Ó Dornach, 27, Oct. 1917
Ñ2) Rudolf Steiner, Lecture 3, Secret Brotherhoods and the Mystery of the Human Double: Seven Lectures.

—=—

“Using TECHNOLOGY developed from TISSUE of an

INTENTIONALLY ABORTED FETUS, but without continuing the cell
line from that fetus, MAY BE MORALLY ACCEPTABLE.” 
ÑImmunization, CHRISTIAN Medical & Dental Associations 2004.

—=—

!270
We are, in these potentially last generations of the Pureness of Nature’s Design and Intent, being
attacked and polluted not only in our minds but in our very blood and genetic make-up. Vaccines
are again literally cannibalistic in their nature, injecting human fetal tissue, proteins (prions), and
DNA into our bodies and directly into the blood stream, bypassing all natural barriers and protect-
ions and causing a responsive immune chaos. Our pure blood has been tainted with countless
protein and DNA fragments of both animal and insect origin used in medical research and
pharmaceuticals, causing genetic “traits” that are of course passed on to our children. Abortion was
in fact legalized for the purposes of making legal the use of aborted and cloned fetal tissue in
medical research that at the time could only be obtained through medical institutes in Sweden,
creating a virtual black market of proÞt and gain from the premature killing and harvesting of
millions of aborted babies.

Examples of entire aftermarket uses for aborted fetal tissue have risen up from that historic,
SECULAR Supreme Court decision regarding the legally granted privilege of harvesting the ßesh
of the murdered dead:

—=—

NeoCutis Acknowledges Cultivating Skin Creams from Aborted Fetus

NeoCutis, a Switzerland-based bio-pharmaceutical company with ofÞces in San Francisco, is

using Processed Skin Cell Protein, or PSP, an ingredient developed FROM SKIN CELLS
HARVESTED FROM AN ABORTED FETUS. Some years ago scientists discovered that fetal
skin has an ability to heal without scarring…

—Canada Free Press online article, title above

—=—

Obama agency rules PEPSI USE OF CELLS DERIVED FROM ABORTED FETUS
‘ORDINARY BUSINESS’

“…We’re not talking about what kind of pencils PepsiCo wants to use — we are talking about
EXPLOITING THE REMAINS OF AN ABORTED CHILD FOR PROFIT,” she said. “USING
HUMAN EMBRYONIC KIDNEY (HEK-293) TO PRODUCE FLAVOR ENHANCERS for
their beverages is a far cry from routine operations!”

—Quote from lifesitenes.com, as quoted from Debi Vinnedge, Executive Director of Children of God for Life

—=—

"The company's key ßavor programs focus on the discovery and development of savory, sweet
and salt ßavor ingredients that are intended to allow for the reduction of MSG, sugar and salt
in food and beverage products… USING ISOLATED HUMAN TASTE RECEPTORS, we
created proprietary TASTE RECEPTOR-BASED ASSAY SYSTEMS THAT PROVIDE A
BIOCHEMICAL OR ELECTRONIC READOUT when a ßavor ingredient interacts with the
receptor."

—Quote from Senomyx on SOTT.net, excerpt from article entitled: “Avoid Any Products Containing Aborted Fetal Cells”

—=—

STATE OF OKLAHOMA - 2nd Session of the 53rd Legislature (2012) - SENATE BILL 1418

AS INTRODUCED: An Act relating to food; prohibiting the manufacture or sale of food or

products which use aborted human fetuses; providing for codiÞcation; and providing an
effective date.

!271
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA: A new section of law
to be codiÞed in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-1150 of Title 63, unless there is created a
duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

No PERSON OR ENTITY shall manufacture or knowingly sell food or any other product
intended for human consumption WHICH CONTAINS ABORTED HUMAN FETUSES IN
THE INGREDIENTS OR WHICH USED ABORTED HUMAN FETUSES IN THE RE-
SEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT OF ANY OF THE INGREDIENTS.

This act shall become effective November 1, 2012.

—State Senate Bill proposed but not passed, by Senator Ralph Shortey, Oklahoma, 53-2-3065 — 1/18/2012

—=—

ÒIn the present case, HUMAN LIVES WERE TAKEN IN ORDER TO PROVIDE CELLS FOR
RESEARCH and, in some cases, precisely to qualify for FEDERAL GRANTS; IN THE CASE
OF VACCINES, TISSUES WERE TAKEN FOLLOWING ABORTIONS PERFORMED FOR
UNRELATED REASONS.”

—The NCCB Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, Vol. 12, No. 4 Aug-Sept 2001, The Human Embryo as Research Commodity Special Edition

—=—

"In order to sustain 96% of the cells, THE LIVE TISSUE WOULD NEED TO BE PRE-
SERVED WITHIN 5 MINUTES OF THE ABORTIONÉ Within one the cells would continue
to deteriorate, rendering the SPECIMENS useless.”

—Dr. C. Ward Kischer, Embryologist and Emeritus Professor of Anatomy; Specialist in Human Embryology, University of Arizona College of Medicine
(Tucson, Arizona) Personal interview 7-02, ALL Conference

—=—

"One of my DUTIES as a young student in the laboratory in Stockholm was TO DISSECT

HUMAN FETUSES FROM LEGAL ABORTIONS AND SEND ORGANS TO THE WISTAR
INSTITUTE. Such material was THE SOURCE of many important studies of CELL LINES
of the Institute, such as Leonard Hayßick's study of WI-38.”

—Norrby, Erling “Listen to the Music: The Life of Hilary Koprowski (review),” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine - Volume 44, Number 2, Spring 2001,
pp. 304-306

—=—

"The isolation of characterization of HUMAN DIPLOID CELL STRAINS FROM FETAL

TISSUE make this type of cell AVAILABLE AS A SUBSTRATE FOR THE PRODUCTION
OF LIVE VIRUS VACCINES. Other than the ECONOMIC ADVANTAGES, such strains in
contrast to heteropoloid cell lines exhibit those characteristics usually reserved for normal or
primary cells and therefore make the consideration of THEIR USE IN THE PRODUCTION
OF HUMAN VIRUS VACCINES A DISTINCT POSSIBILITY.”

ÑL. Hayßick and P. S. Moorhead, ÒThe Serial Cultivation of Human Diploid Cell Strains, Experimental Cell Research,Ó 1961, 25, pg 618

—=—

"Explant cultures were made of the DISSECTED ORGANS OF A PARTICULAR FETUS

ABORTED because of rubella, the 27th in our series of fetuses aborted. This fetus was from
a 25-year-old mother exposed to rubella 8 days after her last menstrual period. 16 days later

!272
she developed rubella. The fetus was surgically aborted 17 days after maternal illness and
dissected immediately. Explants from SEVERAL ORGANS WERE CULTURED AND
SUCCESSFUL CELL GROWTH WAS ACHIEVED from lung, skin, and kidney. It was then
grown on WI-38 (abortive cell-line culture). THE NEW VACCINE WAS TESTED ON
ORPHANS IN PHILADELPHIA.”

—American Journal Diseases of Children; Virus Production and Biological Control of Live Attenuated Rubella Virus Vaccines, Vol. 118 Aug 1969;
Attenuation Of RA273 Rubella Virus; Studies of Immunization With Living Rubella Virus; Arch J. Dis Child vol 110 Oct 1965

—=—


“Xigris received approval from the FDA on 21st November 2001 for the reduction of mortality
in adult patients with severe sepsis who have a high risk of death. Xigris has also been
approved in Puerto Rico, Israel, Australia, Argentina, Peru, Romania, Columbia, Mexico,
Switzerland, India, Singapore and South Africa.”



“Xigris is A GENETICALLY-ENGINEERED VERSION OF THE HUMAN ACTIVATED
PROTEIN C molecule, a naturally-occurring PROTEIN in the body, including coagulation
and suppression of ÞbrinolysisÉÓ



“A HUMAN CELL LINE is used in the production of Xigris, as noted under FDA document,
PC 3420 AMP, in the Þrst paragraph, which states:ÉÓ
 
“Xigris is a recombinant form of human activated protein C. An ESTABLISHED HUMAN
CELL LINE POSSESSING THE COMPLEMENTARY DNA for the inactive human protein
C zymogen SECRETES THE PROTEIN INTO THE FERMENTATION MEDIUM.”

“(HEK 293 ARE CELLS TAKEN FROM THE KIDNEY OF AN ABORTED BABY.)”

—Espicom Business Intelligence, Published 28 August 2002

—=—

“POTENTIAL RISKS OF DNA IN VACCINES”

“RESIDUAL DNA IN VACCINES DERIVED FROM TUMORIGENIC cells, including those

transformed by Ad5, can pose potential risks to the vaccine recipient in two respects:
ONCOGENICITY AND INFECTIVITY. Each of these biological properties must be
considered and evaluated for each cell substrate.”

“The oncogenic risk of cell substrate DNA has been considered to be due to several
mechanisms. First, the residual DNA could have dominant activated oncogenes that could
exert their effect following expression in recipient cells. In the case of Ad5-transformed cells,
the dominant oncogenes would include the E1A and E1B genes. Second, the incoming DNA
could integrate into the host genome in certain genes, such as the p53 gene or the
retinoblastoma susceptibility (RB) gene, TERMED TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENES, which
are involved in cell cycle control among other cellular processes. LOSS OF FUNCTION OF
TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENES HAS BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH CERTAIN HUMAN
TUMORS. Third, integration of residual cell-substrate DNA could result in the activation of
cellular regulatory genes by promoter/enhancer insertion, and this could result in the
development of a neoplastic phenotype; this mechanism for tumor development was
initially described in chickens for LEUKEMIA formation by avian LEUKOSIS VIRUSES.
Another result of integration that has been described is an increased methylation of adjacent
DNA sequences as well as sequences on other chromosomes, although the consequences of
such changes in methylation patterns to a cell ARE UNKNOWN.”

!273
“The second biological activity of DNA that should be considered is its POTENTIAL
INFECTIVITY. If a genome of a DNA virus or the provirus of a retrovirus is present in the
cell substrate used for vaccine manufacture, then THE RESIDUAL DNA has the potential,
UPON INOCULATION INTO THE VACCINE RECIPIENT, TO PRODUCE INFECTIOUS
VIRUS FROM THIS DNA AND THUS ESTABLISH A PRODUCTIVE INFECTION.”

“The assessment of the risk of DNA — both the oncogenic risk and the infectious risk — needs
to be considered both in terms of (1) THE AMOUNT OF RESIDUAL DNA INOCULATED;
and (2) THE CONCENTRATION OF ONCOGENE OR INFECTIOUS GENOME PRESENT
IN THIS DNA…”

“In considering potential risks associated with the use of these so-called Designer Cell
Substrates – i.e., neoplastic cells DERIVED FROM NORMAL HUMAN CELLS transformed
by deÞned viral or cellular oncogenes or BY IMMORTALIZING CELLULAR GENES (e.g.,
telomerase) – OVRR/CBER is considering the approach outlined below within the framework
of a "deÞned-risks" assessmentÉ ÒA deÞned-risks approach to the regulatory assessment of
THE USE OF NEOPLASTIC CELLS AS SUBSTRATES FOR VIRAL VACCINE
MANUFACTUREÓ, In Evolving ScientiÞc and Regulatory Perspectives on Cell Substrates for
Vaccine Development… The use of IMMORTALIZED, NEOPLASTIC HUMAN CELLS as
substrates to develop recombinant viral vectors as vaccines also raises theoretical
CONCERNS WITH REGARD TO POSSIBLE CONTAMINATION WITH TSE/BSE (Human/
transmissible form of Mad Cow Disease) agents.”

—FDA article from FDA website entitled “‘Designer’ Cells as Substrates for the Manufacture of Viral Vaccines”

—=—

“Gajdusek and Gibbs prepared a technical note for the Journal of Neurosurgery… They
pointed out that PHYSICIANS OFTEN MISDIAGNOSED CJD AS ALZHEIMERÕS
DISEASE, as the form of cerebral atrophy known as PickÕs disease, or as many other
conditions INCLUDING BRAIN TUMORS AND STROKES… THEY RECOMMENDED
TREATING ALL ORGANS AS INFECTIOUS, even those Þxed in formaldehyde. They had
found only one chemical, chlorine bleach, that reliably killed the scrapie agent and they
recommended using it to decontaminate ßoors and other surfaces where tissue might have
fallen.”

—Richard Rhodes, excerpt from his book “Deadly Feasts,” quoting Dr. Carlton Gajdusek and Joe Gibb

—=—

“Vaccines — SOME PARTS OF COWS, INCLUDING BLOOD, ENZYMES AND AMINO

ACIDS, ARE USED TO GROW THE BACTERIA AND VIRUSES NEEDED TO MAKE
CERTAIN VACCINES…”

“Insulin — Insulin sold in the United States isnÕt derived from cattle, but youÕre allowed to
import beef insulin FROM OTHER COUNTRIES if you follow speciÞc guidelines. Because
THEREÕS NO WAY TO GUARANTEE THE SAFETY OF IMPORTED INSULIN, talk to your
doctor about the best way to obtain insulin from sources outside the United States.”

—Report entitled “Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease” By Mayo Clinic staff, published October 23, 2012

—=—

VARIVAX [Varicella Virus Vaccine Live (Oka/Merck)]

“VARIVAX… is a preperation of the Oka/Merck strain of live, attenuated varicella virus. The
virus was initially obtained from a child with natural baricella, THEN INTRODUCED

!274
 INTO HUMAN EMBRYONIC LUNG CELL CULTURES, adapted to and propagated IN
EMBRYONIC GUINEA PIG CELL CULTURES and Þnally propagated IN HUMAN
DIPLOID CELL CULTURES (WI-38). Further passage of the virus for varicella vaccine was
performed at Merck Research Laboratories (MRL) IN HUMAN DIPLOID CELL CULTURES
(MRC-5)… EACH 0.5 ML DOSE OF VACCINE CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING…
RESIDUAL COMPONENTS OF MRC-5 CELLS INCLUDING DNA AND PROTEIN.”

—Except taken directly from VARIVAX insert from actual vaccine package

—=—

Is this a moral issue? Certainly, and without question. Is the injection of so many animal, insect,
and infant human abortive DNA/RNA fragments and proteins into the human body, which are
admittedly impossible to Þlter out of the Þnal product of vaccines Ñ is this a mind, body, and soul
issue? Absolutely and self-evidently! Not ironically though, the corporate apologist for the use of
these cells has but one excuse to make us somehow feel better, which is simply that these are most
often from cloned cells kept unnaturally and immortally alive (viable) through modern “science.”
To some, this is the purest deÞnition of a literal Life Lived in hell, not dissimilar to the masses of
people plugged into The Matrix machinery in order to live in illusion while their energy is extracted
for the beneÞt of the AI. From attaching the brain cells of human and animal subjects to computer
chips that control robots and cause them to “think” and respond to external stimuli to the very
disgusting medical practice of intravenous cannibalism we have discussed herein via inoculation,
no man in his right mind would ever face God with such a horriÞc excuse, or any excuse for that
matter. Just as there is no excuse for ignorance of the legal law (except through artiÞcial licensure to
break the Law and Laws of Nature by false gods), the whole of the spiritual Law of moral right,
correctness, and harmony with Nature would never have let this type of research begin in the Þrst
place. Any man in his right and moral mind would burn it to the ground without hesitation. But
who among us has been left to our own mind, in a state of being able to be right-minded? Right-
mindedness is just another word for illegal, for thinking non-legally! And of course, without fund-
ing by the art of Þctional money valuation in mammon and patenting for future proÞts of these few
patent-holding corporations, none of this evil would even be considered as a possibility, let alone
allowed in false consensus. This is just another comprehension of the consequences of ignoring the
Higher Law of Nature, in this case the recreation of the very Reality and Design of Life (God) in
man’s image, a feat that will always end in at least disharmony and at worst disaster in the
Þgurative eyes of God.

To be clear, when Jesus the christ was portrayed comparatively in moral righteousness by over-
turning the tables of the moneychangers in the temple, the moral “person” of today is cowed and
chained in the bonds of legal servitude to a false law and its gods. And so the tables of scientists
creating things millions of times worse than those usurious men of old are allowed to prosper in
their biological crimes and real-time nightmares of genetic re-creation in government sponsored,
sacriÞcial temples. But itÕs just ok, because they have university granted, syndicalist diplomaÕs
(diplomatic status) and legal licenses to do so. Don’t worry, be happy. Take your SOMA and enjoy
the Brave New World they are geo-engineering around you. And hey, the side-effects of their
ÒresearchÓ are covered by insurance as are their legal names and ßattering titles, so their crimes
against Nature and their purposefully forced evolution (the unfolding of Nature’s Design) are pre-
forgiven by the false gods of the nations. ItÕs ok if a corporation (artiÞcial person) does it, you
know? And soon robots will take the blame off of our shoulders all together, so that no
responsibility for any of this will be found anywhere at all Ñ artiÞcial creations working for
(enslaved by) artiÞcial persons (corporations) run by spiritually dead men in the persona of
unethical, amoral, and unconscious ßattering titles of employment (use). This is the future your
children will inherit… that is, if you are allowed or medically capable to have them.

But what if they were right so many decades ago, that our spirituality and moral code could be
vaccinated against and thus reprogrammed or annihilated from our very brains? Would the up-
rising of so much immoral and outright hellishly evil research be a surprising outcome-based

!275
prediction of such a feat? Would not the perfect modern “scientist” unbound by any possible moral
constraint through some inoculated immunity against that part of the brain be the resulting traits
sought after, not only in scientiÞc communities but also in the very law-making structure of
legislative politics and judicial opinion-making?

After 10 years of vaccine research, this book could be Þlled with just this authorÕs collected research
and studies about vaccination and its use in the purposeful sterilization and spread of dis-ease
among the nations (goyim) and animal kingdoms of the world. The issue surpasses the left-right
political debate and, as Steiner and Huxley both raved, makes vaccines the absolute golden-child of
globalization and population control, through the killing of spirituality and fulÞllment of the Brave
New World model. In the end, there are not thousands of individual diseases out there, but actually
very few, expressing symptoms in thousands of various ways depending on the design of the
patented vaccine and its ingredients. Be it Alzheimer's or Parkinson's, ALS or the new polio, often
called as (vaccine induced) ÒChronic Fatigue Syndrome,Ó all of these are merely differently ex-
pressed symptoms of the same dis-ease, a reaction to vaccine contamination and chemical pollution
of the blood, immune system, and foundational genetic code of the body.

But let us continue with the subject at hand, the weaponization not only of the ßesh but of legal
words, both of which are only different systems (literally and Þguratively) designed for the
corruption of blood…

Could this type of ÒSupremeÓ decision to universally (federally) ÒlegalizeÓ abortion really have
happened in a government ruled by christÕs teachings as the only Law of GodÕs Word? Obviously
not, and without question, no. This is purely a legal, secular, worldly case and opinion of the
pleasures of the ßesh. And so we must learn to always Live a lifestyle in which we consciously see
through the artiÞce to realize such a false nature, thus always comprehending the evil (artiÞcial)
intent of the purely ßattering title of any proclaimed ÒChristian nationÓ and its magisterial gods in
black robes, whom in this case condemned all that are unborn and some that were recently born to
doom (pre-judgement) and to a tortuous death penalty in a debtorÕs prison, and to become the
defenseless victims of undeÞned but ofÞcial Òmedical science.Ó

There is no pro or con on this issue. It is an evil practice. It is nothing to be celebrated or protected,
especially when an entire not-so-black market body-part industry has been created from it. Waste
not, want not. Why let a perfectly good set of infant organs, stem-cells, and cell substrates go to
waste by being tossed in the trash?

To be clear, this legalization of abortion was never designed to protect a womanÕs right to choose,
only to protect ÒscientistsÓ from being bound to any substance of the moral law through the legal
license to harvest, use, sell, and clone aborted fetuses. The Truth always hurts. Even as the pro-
choice advocates claim that pro-life advocates are anti-choice, no one ever stops to consider that
pro-choice advocates must therefore be labeled and accept their opposite dis-position as anti-Life.
One cannot be opposite and also not opposite. The right to forced Life is certainly the opposite, as
the other side of the right to forced death. Like all legal rights, this one in particular is the best
example of how rights are forced upon the persons of men and how skewed and degenerated
morals are propagandized upon the public goyim for proÞt at their own expense.

Amazingly, Norma McCorvey (A.K.A. JANE ROE, a play off of Jane Doe) of the infamous Roe vs.
Wade supreme court decision is now and has for a long time been an active advocate against
abortion, claiming openly that she was tricked by unscrupulous attorneys into being the voice of
pro-choice. It was not Norma that won this case, but attorneys with totally separate agendas.
Norma never sought an abortion, claiming that she was tricked into signing a contract that allowed
that case to be committed in her pseudonym. In fact, she was hardly even present for most of the
court proceedings, a pawn used in dishonor and in shame.

!276
 —=—

“I was the Jane Roe of Roe vs. Wade, but Jane Roe has been laid to
rest… I used the name Jane Roe because I didn't want my personal
name to be involved in it.”

“The holocaust against the unborn is the greatest sin they could ever do
or even ever participate in.”

“It's not your body, it's not your choice, because you got that from God.
He gave that to you.”

“They tried to discredit me. I used to tell them, There's many wonderful
people out there who can't have children, who would want to have these
children.”

“I DIDN'T ATTEND ANY OF THE COURT PROCEEDINGS.”

ÒThe abortionist I worked for, he's a very greedy man, a selÞsh manÉ l
don't think there is a good reason for an abortion, but Dr. Jasper made
me really realize it was just a racket. He was just doing it for the money.
He didn't care about the women.”

“If they don't care about me, how can they possibly care about anyone
else?”
—Norma McCorvey, A.K.A. “JANE ROE” (separate quotes)

—=—

As we will cover later in this Þrst volume, the nation is not bound by the Bible in any way, shape,
or form with regard to its own legal creations. The ßattering title of ÒChristianÓ nation is no
different then that same title applied to the pagan government of Rome. The actions of Americans
in the legal system of the nation should be proof enough of this, but some may insist due to such
public-minded distraction and propaganda that this is indeed a titled ÒChristianÓ nation, though
with nothing to actually back that claim up. So let us look a bit closer at the words of the fathers
(gods) of this nation to be clear, remembering the very essential difference between the private
States in union (compact) and the corporation they created called as a nation the ÒUnited States.Ó
The nation is one entity, the States are 50 unique bodies of private People. The plural sounding title
of the ÒUnited StatesÓ is a clever confusion and obfuscation of its actual legal existence as purely a
municipal corporation and district that is completely foreign from those 50 States united.

—=—

"As THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS

NOT, IN ANY SENSE, FOUNDED ON THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION;
as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or

!277
 tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered
into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is
declared by the parties that NO PRETEXT ARISING FROM
RELIGIOUS OPINIONS SHALL EVER PRODUCE AN
INTERRUPTION OF THE HARMONY EXISTING BETWEEN THE
TWO COUNTRIES.”
—“Treaty of peace and friendship between the United States of America and the Bey and Subjects of Tripoli, of Barbary," also called the “Treaty of Tripoli,” Article
11, as approved by U.S. Senate and signed by President John Adams, and also published in The Philadelphia Gazette on 17 June 1797.

—=—

Remembering that the Supreme Court of the United States is part of the United States district of
Columbia, we mustn’t confuse its decisions as having anything to do with any type or substance of
moral and religious standards, and that it is purely a commercial court of the various systems of
mammon. It is also important to note that if the nation was indeed christ-like in its actions, which is
of course self-evidently an impossibility of Nature considering the artiÞcial nature and legal
structure of what the Þction of government is, it would not need in any way to recreate a pathetic
“public law” such as this:

Public Law 97-280, 97th Congress - OCT. 4, 1982 - 96 STAT. 1211

Joint Resolution: Authorizing and requesting the President to proclaim 1983 as the "Year of
the Bible.”

Whereas the Bible, THE WORD OF GOD, has made a unique CONTRIBUTION in shaping
the United States as a distinctive and blessed nation and people;

Whereas deeply held religious convictions springing from the Holy Scriptures led to the early
settlement of our Nation… as in the words of President Jackson that THE BIBLE IS "THE
ROCK ON WHICH OUR REPUBLIC RESTS;”

Whereas the history of our Nation clearly illustrates the value of VOLUNTARILY
APPLYING THE TEACHINGS OF THE SCRIPTURES in the lives of individuals, families,
and societies;

Whereas this Nation now faces great challenges that will test this Nation as it has never been
tested before; and

Whereas that renewing our knowledge of and faith in God through Holy Scripture can
strengthen us as a nation and a people: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled, That the President is authorized and requested to designate 1983 as a
national "Year of the Bible" in recognition of both the FORMATIVE INFLUENCE the Bible
has been for our Nation, and our national NEED TO STUDY AND APPLY the teachings of
the Holy Scriptures.

Approved October 4, 1982.

—=—

The reader should take one and only one thing away from this congressional statement of false
lawÉ that acting christ-like is a voluntary choice and action, not a mere legally assigned ßattering

!278
title, and that the legal state (nation) is the opposite of that choice, created to catch, entrap, and
corrupt utterly the ill-chosen fallen. This self-evident Truth will become clear and without doubt as
we proceed.

When we read these statements, at Þrst (vulgar) appearance, they seem to be almost opposite to one
another. This is because the word and empty title of “Christian” is used with its always deceitful,
Roman (pagan) intent. And yet these public laws (one as a treaty and thus positive law) say the
exact same thing. The United States national government is not in any way based in its legal (anti-
God) laws upon the actual Word (Son) of God. Moral Law is absent, unenforceable, and bypassed
via contractual substitution.

And to be clear, here in the law (treaty) the government of the United States is clear upon three
established points:

1) The Bible is the Word (Law) of God (The Highest Authority).

2) The Bible is not the Law of the United States (of the idols/gods of the nation).

3) The Bible must be voluntarily applied by individuals and over their own families.

Whatever one's vulgar beliefs, this commercial declaration of intent and law by congress cannot be
ignored. Most importantly, this means that government recognizes the Bible as the Highest Law
above all other gods, even themselves. This is not done merely on a whim, but is necessary for their
very existence in corporate corruption. They are reminding us of our individual, voluntary choice
between good and evil, between GodÕs Reality and their own legal Þction, and that without this
choice they would be powerless. They must trick us into volunteerism under the doctrine of master
and servant. The devil only rules men’s souls by contract. Metaphorically, the devil is all that is (the
oneness of) artiÞce and all men acting in persona and in ßattering titles, including congress
persons.

—=—

“…We ought to obey God rather than men.”

—Acts 5:29, KJB

—=—

Government acknowledges the important Reality of choice and volunteerism here, even while
warning of its own evil intent against God’s Nature that must be checked by and only by the Word
of these scriptural teachings. Certainly no year of the Bible would need to be falsely (legally)
created by congress if the law of the nation was the actual Bible in testament of christ (the Word/
Law of God)! Every year… in fact, every single instant would thus be the year of the Bible without
need of declaration! For let us not forget that the concept of a “year” (a term of man’s art) does not
Exist in the timeless Being of the Eternal Jehovah. Neither are there actually (in Reality, in Nature)
24 “hours” in a “day.” While the word time is used by many meanings in many instances, the word
clock is simply not in the Bible. And while we do Þnd the word ÒdialÓ as a transliteration of Strong's
H4609 - ma`alah, we Þnd its meaning to be used only metaphorically as that which makes a step
(e.g., of a sundial), degree, or ascent. Nature knows no clock and no calendar, though its stars and
planets certainly create the delusion of time passing through Its intricate Design and placement,
speciÞcally as according to the perception of Its beholder. And such a notion of a predictably
repetitive, celestial clock has certainly been documented and used in various almanacs.

But again, this use of the word clock is Þgurative, and quite limiting in our spiritual understanding
of Jehovah and its Design. It turns what is Natural into an invention of man, a lesser, dead art form
of what is Real. It is not this technology (art) that is evil, nor is its use sinful, unless the art is thus

!279
worshiped while the Source (God) and Nature of that art form is abandoned. When one worships
only the effect (step) upon the sundial and thus looses appreciation and respect of the Nature and
Source of that which causes the effect, then that which one holds as secularly (worldly) sacred
causes his actions based thereupon to be cursed. And in the end, we are all wound up in the
artiÞcial, time-based society we see today, where the falsely created illusion of time always running
out is a constant cause of continued human trafÞcking and vain commerce. We are constantly Òon
the clock,Ó so that all DEAD-lines for spiritually DEAD things can be met in mammon by DEAD
persons acting in the agency of that DEAD god of money valuation.

So that this universal concept is clear, we must be always conscious that it is not the clock or the
shadow of the sundial or even those anthropomorphized, astrological characters that ancient man
created out of the patterns of the stars that causes and is the Source (Nature) of what we perceive
and call as the passage of time. What we call and respect as time is only our Existence and Being
within and as part of the Whole that is Jehovah. This Force that we call as time controls us, we do
not control it. We grow old and die by Its hand so that It may Live on in an Eternity that we cannot
permanently alter, though we can sure mess it up for a while. And in the end, it is not how much of
that time we have but what we do within It. We have only that of our own actions to be judged,
which either serve It as the substance of our God (Jehovah) or work vainly and pointlessly against
it to fulÞll only our own temporary, ßeeting desires and artful designsÉ future generations of Life
be damned!

Scriptural Law and any manÕs adherence to It is voluntary and is nothing if not a Lifestyle choice
by each man, not part of any legally (artiÞcially) created nation (master), which only creates the
strictest of involuntary laws for its voluntarists (subjects/servants in surety). The legal contract
(strict wording) kills the spirit of the law, as the maxim portends. A nation makes no choice for
itself, for it is an unthinking Þction (tool) operated by the strict Roman law-men (acting gods) that
created it and whose heirs will continue to ratify and speak it into more modern versions of its
corporate simulation (false existence). The religious restraint and respect of an amoral legal law by
men in ßattering title of government will be the reßection of the allowance of legal law in the
nation by its common people over their own moral rectitude. The power of a nation, in other
words, is the inverse indicator of the lack of power by that nationally impounded people to self-
govern their own actions by a Higher Law than that of corrupt men in organized crime (govern-
ment). And let us not forget that no religious test is allowed to be given to any United States or
state politician, according to their very own constitution (creation). In other words, every single
religion (i.e., every single moral or immoral doctrine/law) may be present and in power (election/
respect) within our government. This spells a-n-a-r-c-h-y. How can anyone mistake this to be
ÒChristianÓ in Nature, unless we understand that Christian is just a word of man, which means
what it did in the Roman Empire that created it as merely paganism by another, ßattering title?

Note here the difference between a True test and the administering of any oath:

TEST - To bring one to a trial and examination, or to ascertain THE TRUTH OR THE
QUALITY OR FITNESS of a thing. Something by which to ascertain THE TRUTH respecting
another thing; A CRITERION, GAUGE, STANDARD, OR NORM. In public law, an inquiry
or examination addressed to a person appointed or elected to a public ofÞce, to ascertain his
qualiÞcations therefor, but particularly a scrutiny of his political, religious, or social views,
or his attitude of past and present loyalty or disloyalty. (Black4)

TEST OATH - An oath required to be taken as a criterion of the Þtness of the person to Þll a
public or political ofÞce; BUT PARTICULARLY AN OATH OF FIDELITY AND
ALLEGIANCE (past or present) TO THE ESTABLISHED GOVERNMENT. (Black4)

—=—

Government merely requires an oath to it, and so any two-bit hustler may easily become a govern-
ment employee or congressman without any moral (religious) test of his character. Political and

!280
social views have absolutely nothing to do with moral standing and Law. This is no different from
pledging loyalty to a street gang, that one loves the color blue and hates the color red or vice versa,
and will kill to defend his beloved color.

Of course, the scriptures always instruct us to demand a religious test, a trial, and nothing could be
more reasonable and logical for a self-proclaimed, so-called “Christian” People! That is, unless they
are living in a legal matrix of lies…

—=—

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but TRY THE SPIRITS WHETHER
THEY ARE OF GOD: because many false prophets are gone out into the
world… And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in
the ßesh IS NOT OF GOD: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof
ye have heard that it should come; AND EVEN NOW ALREADY IS IT
IN THE WORLD.”
—1 John 4:1, 3 KJB

—=—

Here we come to an almost insurmountable stumbling block, thanks to the vague terms chosen by
the kings transliterators. This metaphor that Jesus Christ Òis come in the ßeshÓ causes the literalist
to close down immediately. But of course, as the Òßesh,Ó or Strong's G4561 - sarx, (σάρξ), is deÞned
as carnal or simply carnal minded. The term ‘to follow after the ßeshÕ is used of those who are on
the search for persons with whom they may gratify their lust.”

TheyerÕs Greek Lexicon is clear in its metaphoric (poetic) deÞnition of ßesh (sarx), where it states:
“2. i.q. the body, not designating it, however, as a skillful combination of related parts (Ôan organ-
ism,Õ)É but signifying the material or substance of the living bodyÉ one body, as husband and
wifeÉ (the human)É of diseaseÉ to offer up in sacriÞce my ßeshÑChrist is speakingÉ life on
earth, which is passed in the body (ßesh)É Paul uses this expression with designed ambiguity in
order to involve also the ethical sense, Ôto be in power over the ßesh,Õ to be prompted and governed
by the ßeshÉ operating in the promiseÉ that which has been born of the natural man is a natural
man (opposed to one who has been born again by the power of the Holy Spirit)É the sensuous
nature of man Ôthe animal natureÕ; without any suggestion of depravityÉ the animal nature which
cravings which incite to sinÉ”

Finally, in explanation of the personiÞed character of christ Òin the ßesh (sarx)Ó, we read: Òeither
expressly or tacitlyÉ has an ethical sense and denotes mere human nature, the earthly nature of
man apart from divine inßuence, and therefore proved to sin and opposed to God; accordingly it
includes whatever in the soul is weak, low, debased, tending to ungodliness and viceÉ note that
ÔßeshÕ signiÞes the entire nature of man, sense and reason, without the Holy SpiritÉ”

Nothing this author can think of could possibly be more difÞcult than that of attempting to trans-
late the Greek language into dog-Latin English. For how does one speak to a literalist from a poets
perspective? How can romance be translated into cold, hard facts? How can the feeling of express-
ing love and feeling through words be compared to the frustration of using such a mongrel thief of
a language as English? How can an allegory, a metaphor, a parable, or any moral story be clearly
expressed in proper English?

The point of this verse is to stress that christ was not Jehovah (all of self-Existence) nor to be
worshiped as such, but instead respected (contemplated) as the Son (Word/Law) of God
personiÞed as a man tempted by the ßesh, and that unlike the Perfection of what is Jehovah, which

!281
is never any man but wholly the entirety of the Universe (all in self-Existence), his character
allegorically held the same capacities for weaknesses of the ßesh to the temporal, secular world as
any man. And this metaphor of the ßesh always refers to worldly, secular, sinful (artiÞcial) dis-
tractions and temptations, which christ must overcome in his moral story and as the example for all
other men, and so we say in verse (poetically) that he is come in the ßesh. He is presented in the ßesh.
He wouldn’t be much of a teacher or mentor to any man if he was a cow, or a god, immune to that
which is designed and persuades any and every man towards sin, and so christ’s story is that of
every man as a potential sinner, of course. He who is not suffering from the human condition can-
not be used as an example for others to defeat their human faults. And so the Law (Son) of God
came metaphorically in the ßesh, as the allegory of Jesus christ (the spiritually Living Son/Law/
Word of God). His example, in other words, is one that every man can and must strive to attain for
themselves, to become the sons of God. To consider Jesus christ as merely a man that happened to
live in the artful Roman timeline of some historically recorded adventure is to completely miss the
message. To worship christ as a supernatural (above nature) god-man that Lived and died without
the ßesh would be to admonish one’s Self from the ability to seek and become christ-like and the
capacity to remain that way under the Light of the Law (Son). Christ is the Son of Jehovah, not the
god of Jehovah — which, let’s not forget, forbids all other gods. It is foolish to consider the Word
and commandments of God to have no other gods, while at the same time worship Jesus christ as
some kind of supernatural god-man. This is an idolatry, or as it’s better known, Romanized
“Christianity” of all denominations (names).

—=—

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: FOR IT IS THE POWER

OF GOD UNTO SALVATION TO EVERY ONE THAT BELIEVETH; to
the Jew Þrst, and also to the Greek.”
ÑRomans 1:16, KJB

—=—

To be even more vulgar in this breakdown of the dog-Latin terms of the king, I would certainly not
genuinely or with spiritual purpose tell the story of say King Arthur as a jackass, or Robin Hood as
a red fox such as what the Disney Corporation might do in its cartoonish, adversarial to Reality
productions. Instead, I would anthropomorphize these heroes as mere mortal men without such
characteristics or super-natural (above Nature) protections of divinity, so that all others may
follow and become akin to that character upon their own moral story and path. But what I
certainly wouldn’t do is ruin the whole damn moral story by vainly trying to prove the Reality of
those charactersÕ actual or Þctional existence in history, which is an impossibility on both sides of
the argument. History cannot be proven any more than a negative (non-existence) can be evidenced
positively. But the literalist will press this issue, even when in the next sentence the Reality of the
miracle of virgin birth and other non-human, super hero characteristics of christ are also argued.

But let us attempt to end this debate right here by introducing the ultimate question. Did Jesus
christ “Exist” as a man, or was he merely an allegorical character amongst so many others written
into parabolic life to teach the moral Law as the personiÞed Word of God? Was he both of these?

I propose a different question, one that often brings the self-evident Truth out from hiding.

What is that question? Simply: WHO BENEFITS?

To be even more clear by our inquiry, let us ask: Who or what beneÞts by the purposeful mis-
transliteration of ancient writings so that a Þctional character is worshiped instead (vicariously) as
a Real man instead of as the potentiality of every moral man under God?

!282
No private, individual man will ever beneÞt by worshiping Jesus the Christos (Anointed) as a
supernatural (above nature) god, or more speciÞcally, as that which is an unobtainable Þgurehead.
Examples are meant to be followed and emulated, not worshiped as that which is godlike and
untouchable. Only by following the Son (Word/Law) of Jehovah may man Þnd all the beneÞts,
Natural Freedoms, and abundance of GodÕs gift of Nature.

So no man in any way beneÞts from the belief that Jesus christ was a Living man in history. It saves
one in no way to worship an external idol as opposed to striving to become internally the intention
of his belief.

That is, unless one follows not the Bible but the forbidden doctrines of the so-called, ßatteringly
titled, ÒChristianÓ religious denominations (names) of universal infamy. For idol worship is the
very foundation of church and state, through artful symbology and simulation. In other words, no
man beneÞts from the belief in Jesus christ as a Real man in history unless he subscribes not to
GodÕs Law of Nature, but to the law (doctrine) of the corporate church and state that pretends to
license and forgive his sins (syn), for then he may have a legal (anti-God) status within those corp-
orate structures and their false law (doctrines). He may pretend to live irresponsible of his own
actions.

The point here is that, in the end, it is only the organized church and its married but separated legal
state that beneÞts from such a belief system involving the worshiping of Jesus christ, or that of any
other church-declared ÒsaintÓ or mother Mary (Fatima) worship, for it is this very externalization
of christ and thus GodÕs Law that causes men to fall under the power and authority of the legal and
ecclesiastical law (doctrine) of the church and state. The church must maintain that christ was a
man in Roman history, for without such a belief, its pope and its other ÒdefendersÓ as kings and
queens cannot claim to be the vicars replacement of christ (and thus God) on Earth. They cannot
claim the power to alter GodÕs Word without the belief that they are themselves in the ofÞces of
GodÕs incarnate.



And so the only beneÞciary of this corporate ÒChristianÓ belief system is the church itself, from
which the ßattering corporate ofÞce and title of vicar (replacement) of christ stems. No man may
become a son of God unless he Þrst endures the trials and tribulations of becoming christ-like, of
following the example given us by the allegorical story of the New Testament. For if christÕs ex-
ample be followed, no man would ever become or remain in the legal or ecclesiastical doctrines of
church and state, he would take no oaths and take no names or numbers, he would hold no
member-ships or ßattering titles upon his God-given name and would absolutely respect no per-
sons whatsoever, especially those corporations (artiÞcial persons) of church and state.

And so, whatever your personal belief about the history (his story), the KingÕs translated story of
Jesus the christ, the question of who beneÞts is clear. The author only wishes to rid the reader of
any beliefs that may interfere with the self-evident Truths put forth from the Bible.

But with this understanding of the story, of the allegoric character being vulnerable to the ßesh, be-
ing reference to the lifestyle and worldly temptations of the unregenerate man, as those currently
not acting under GodÕs Law (Son) but under the legal system of manÕs law, we can also understand
its use elsewhere in the Bible:

—=—

“My little children, of whom I travail IN BIRTH AGAIN UNTIL

CHRIST BE FORMED IN YOU, I DESIRE TO BE PRESENT WITH
YOU NOW, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you. Tell me,
ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is
written, THAT ABRAHAM HAD TWO SONS, THE ONE BY A

!283
 BONDMAID, THE OTHER BY A FREEWOMAN. But he who was of
the bondwoman WAS BORN AFTER THE FLESH; but he of the
freewoman WAS BY PROMISE. WHICH THINGS ARE AN
ALLEGORY: FOR THESE ARE THE TWO COVENANTS… NOW WE,
BRETHREN, AS ISAAC WAS, ARE THE CHILDREN OF PROMISE.
BUT AS THEN HE THAT WAS BORN AFTER THE FLESH
PERSECUTED HIM THAT WAS BORN AFTER THE SPIRIT, EVEN SO
IT IS NOW. Nevertheless what saith the scripture? CAST OUT THE
BONDWOMAN AND HER SON: FOR THE SON OF THE
BONDWOMAN SHALL NOT BE HEIR WITH THE SON OF THE
FREEWOMAN. So then, brethren, WE ARE NOT CHILDREN OF THE
BONDWOMAN, BUT OF THE FREE.”
—Galatians 4:19-31, KJB

—=—

In this particular, admitted allegory of scripture, we are to learn the lesson intended, which is to
keep our God-given name clean and after christ (the Law). If the reader is looking for some other
legal remedy or some other legal reward within that matrix of the legal Þction of mammon and
government within this work of mine, I will stop you here and now. If you don’t understand what
is stated above, then you are perhaps to far gone after the ßesh.

One thing is for sure, the church and state would not survive if men suddenly obtained Biblical
scripture in its True intent, for all its once tithing members would abandon that corporation under
mammon and it would fall straight into the bankrupt shadow and doctrine it casts.

Christ is not returning in the ßesh, but will only be manifestly formed within you, by your own Pure
and Loving actions and works under the Law of God, when you become again the reborn (into the
Reality of Nature) and unblemished sons of God by following God’s Son (Law/Word). Money and
other secular rewards or remedies have no place in this chosen course of moral Purity and Law. For
even as I once persecuted any who tried to speak religion to me in the past, I am now he who will
be persecuted by fools like my former, corrupted self. Natural Freedom is not to be found in the
political, legal realm, but only under the promise of the Grace of God through the following of
christ (Natural Law). Do not let the religious sounding overtones of these words cause the power of
such allegory and metaphor to be lost in conceit. This is the Real deal. And the gods of the nations
are well aware of it, even as they do all they can to obfuscate the scriptural Truth from all of their
own syndicalist institutions and means of education and entertainment. The devil always rules by
deceit, dis-tractions, and trickery. You will never Þnd Truth in the legal realm, and to be clear, the
son of a “bondwoman” can only be another bonded strawman, a legal persona, a citizen (subject)
of the legal state and its legal (anti-God, antichrist) law. And so, if you patriotically still believe
money or legal things are the way and the light, then you may as well stop reading this work here
and now. For now that you know the meaning, the deÞnition of the word God as ÒJehovahÓ as
intended to be used in the Bible, the entire meaning and intent of the entire Bible is also necessarily
thus redeÞned from out of the vulgarness of the kingÕs intentions in dog-Latin.

These so-called antichrists, in whatever form, system, technology (art) or persona (mask) they pre-
sent themselves within are said to already be in the world in this Book of John. The reader must
know that what is and what is able to become antichrist will never be destroyed or eradicated, that
it will always be close as darkness surrounds the light, and that only the Law of Nature may thwart
its effect upon us. If this were not True, then the Word/Son of God would not be necessary. What it

!284
is certainly is no great mystery, and its identity is no great secret. What is antichrist is anything
opposing or attempting to replace christ (the Son), which is how man follows the Law/Word of
God and Nature. There is no “coming” antichrist, for as the Bible states so eloquently, nothing is
new under the sun. In other words, this antichrist force and spirit resides in men’s hearts and
minds and in all of man’s inventions that are not in harmony with Nature’s Son (Law), just as the
spirit of christ also resides within the repentant, reborn man. But the darkness always hides behind
the Light, and can take over the Light through the trickery and word magic we are exposing now,
which is why the scriptures are to be continuously and for all one’s Life read and understood
(obeyed) as the Highest and only Law.

—=—

“Thus saith the LORD (Jehovah); CURSED BE THE MAN THAT

TRUSTETH IN MAN, and maketh ßesh his arm, and WHOSE HEART
DEPARTETH FROM THE LORD. For he shall be like the heath in the
desert, and shall not see when good cometh; but shall inhabit the
parched places in the wilderness, in a salt land and not inhabited.
BLESSED IS THE MAN THAT TRUSTETH IN THE LORD (Jehovah),
AND WHOSE HOPE THE LORD IS. For he shall be as a tree planted by
the waters, and that spreadeth out her roots by the river, and shall not
see when heat cometh, but her leaf shall be green; and shall not be
careful in the year of drought, neither shall cease from yielding fruit.Ó
—Jeremiah 17: 5-8, KJB

—=—

To trust in Jehovah is literally to trust in God’s Creation, in Nature, in only the Reality of all things.
It is to rid oneself of all Þctions and false, legal id-entities, and to rely on (trust in) only the
abundance of Source. The second one relies on the artiÞcial structures and legal trusts (words) of
men, including their superstructures of nations and cities, then oneÕs roots are destined to Þnd
exactly what man has to offer, nothing at all. For his water is not wet, his air is not breathable, his
dwellings are not Livable, and his food has no nutrients. For he has stripped himself from his
Source and pretends ItÕs Law does not apply to him or his own patented re-creations and actions.
Drought of every Natural, spiritual, intellectual, and metaphoric kind will eventually ruin him and
his inharmonious creation, for his law and his nature is always without foundational roots to his
Source (Lord). And so what does this verse tell us? Just keep it Real, man. Follow GodÕs only be-
gotten Son, the personiÞcation of the Word, as the Law of Nature. But most importantly, worship
Jehovah not as a man named Jesus christ, but by following Jesus christ’s example of how to Live
under Jehovah and Its Law (Word/Son). For we are to have no other gods before Nature’s God.

As we will come to discover and show as self-evident and thus without doubt, it is the very fact
that the United States is not of christ (not a part of the Natural Creation and Law of Jehovah), and
by the Laws of Nature and Reason certainly cannot ever be, that no religious test is required of its
legal (anti-God) lawmakers. And just why this purely secular ÒrightÓ to be free from such a
Òreligious testÓ is protected under the constitution. Nothing that is artiÞcial can ever pass a
religious (moral) test, unless its agent lies on its behalf, for no morals can possibly Exist in artiÞcial
persons, places, and things. The name and title does not make (Create) the man.

Notice that in the Treaty of Tripoli above, a speciÞc statement was made that established the ab-
solute lack of religious view or stance and thus requiring an absence of any Higher moral Law for
the nation and its representatives (agents), where it states that: “NO PRETEXT ARISING FROM

!285
RELIGIOUS OPINIONS SHALL EVER PRODUCE AN INTERRUPTION OF THE HARMONY
EXISTING BETWEEN THE TWO COUNTRIES.” This means that no moral Law Exists in the
jurisdiction of the US that would be against the Muslim or Jewish scriptural Law of the Quran or
Talmud. This, as a foundation, means explicitly that the Bible plays no actual or ofÞcial part in the
legalistic law systems of the United States except as a decoration, as will be further shown later in
this work. Not ironically, these are also the accepted sacred books of the various freemason lodges,
referred to as the furniture of the lodge, though having nothing to do with the conduct of that
society of organized criminals. Like religions, the power of the Bible is utilized to control (govern)
the minds of men towards evil, not to enlighten them towards self-government under God. And so
the only secret they worship under the rose is that their organizations are themselves the source of
the common man’s ignorance of True spiritual and scriptural knowledge, for without it, their
power and functionality would be lost. The priest-class will never translate sacred works without
Þrst cyphering their words to encode the True message, meaning, and intent of their Source. The
dogs must be kept barking pointlessly in dog-Latin.

This antichrist, anti-God disposition of all nations must be clear before we move on, though any
doubts in the reader will be satiated as we progress.

Do not be fooled either by words such as individual, for in the legal realm they can only point to
Þction, to property, and are only ever alternative words and descriptions for legal persons
(statuses), as Þctional creations of law. The word individual is opposed to a corporation (multiple
persons incorporated into a single new and whole artiÞcial person). Thus in a limited way it
signiÞes a legally assigned privacy, but not Real privacy in Nature. Property (a contract of words
on paper) cannot be private from its creator or master, those legal gods of the terms of art. And so
we Þnd that to be an individual is to be without division from the whole, but considered at a
speciÞc time and place to be singled out from that whole by name and number, as human capital.
Like an apple from the tree that cannot Exist without the nourishment of its connection to the
whole, an individual cannot exist without the jurisdiction that supports it, as the only place where
the whole (kind) exists. Likewise, to consider one cow at a time individually is to consider that cow
only as a single part of the whole, not as a free cow separate from the whole. And so as towards
these seemingly harmless legal terms of art we must never allow our True Selves to be identiÞed
with any of them.

INDIVIDUAL - [Latin individuus; in and dividuus, from divido, to divide.] 1. NOT DIVIDED,
or not to be divided; single; one; as an individual man or city. --Under his great vicegerent
reign abide. UNITED, as one individual soul. 2. Pertaining to one only; as individual labor or
exertions. - noun - A single PERSON or HUMAN being. This is the common application of the
word; as, there was not an individual present. 1. A single ANIMAL OR THING OF ANY
KIND. But this word, as a noun, is rarely applied except to human beings. (Webs1828)

INDIVIDUAL - Pertaining or belonging to a single or distinct PERSON, considered apart

FROM A NUMBER OF PERSONS JOINTLY ASSOCIATED OR INVOLVED; personal;
private: as, individual Ñ assets, liability. See Liability; Partnership; Contribution. (WCA1889)

—=—

To be clear, unless one is merely a subservient part of some whole, one would never need to
designate his persona as an individual. This, again, is a term of property. It requires the whole to be
deÞned for the part to be proved. An individual is never in ambiguity, for an individual is one that
is not divided from some whole, but considered as a single part. Remember, a corporation is a
person too, made up of some or all of the several individuals (parts) of the whole.

The individual (personal) assets and liabilities of any public person of the United States are
property of the whole, of the public, and registered to be used in a limited and regulated privacy by
the individual person. But this is a privacy that only exists and is deÞned in the Þction of the
principal, applied and protected only upon the person (property of the principal), not the man.

!286
That personal property can be taken (conÞscated) at any time under law and eminent domain. For
the person exists only in the domain of the eminent priest-class of politicians of the established and
ordained legal church and state.

In the end, one's goal is to be re-born back into one's original Nature, back to Source, becoming
again an unblemished son of God, at which point the only ambiguous meaning of this word
individual that is respected by any man of God is to be undivided from GodÕs Law and People. To
be undivided from our own Nature and Source is to be Truly individual from all things Þction.

And so as stated, each individual man must make the individual choice to be governed by the
moral, self-governing scriptural Law if he wishes to escape the false law of the idolatrous gods and
rulers of any legal nation. This includes especially those administrative judges (magistrates), which
by law are not allowed to act religiously or according to their own moral judgement despite their
own personal moral Law and religious belief. Instead these subordinate judges may act only legally
(of the antichrist spirit) in the legal persona and title they represent in that profession of amoral
legal law, as was seen in the Roe vs. Wade case. Belief without action is a prescription for hellÉ

And what is the most oft spoken Law of GodÕs Nature? Respect not the persons of men! Carry no
false burdens of surname or ßattering title, and no straw allowed. In the artiÞcial jurisdiction of the
state, there is no higher Law than that which its gods in magistracy create and control, for what is
Higher cannot be controlled by what is lower. And so GodÕs Law is ignored by sanction. This is the
very moral crack in the shell of all ßattering titles, for the title is never one's own. The law of the
title, of the false persona, is always legal and designed by men for purposefully immoral actions,
intended for the sole purpose of inequity and anarchy (lawlessness) towards that spiritual, Highest
and self-evident (unwritten) Law of Self-responsibility. The creation of any Þctional person serves
no purpose towards fulÞlling GodÕs Law of Nature, and in scriptural fact is a direct violation of
said Commandments. This same sentiment is seen over and over in the writings of these gods and
as quoted throughout this work. ItÕs always about destroying through the word-magic of contracts
our private choice. And those who can be made to choose mammon must therefore choose
publicity, a voluntary servitude to that which is adversarial to GodÕs priceless and timeless Nature.

A ÒChristianÓ nation is an oxymoron, a Þction of the mind. Can there be a Creation of God (part of
the Verbosity of the Reality of Nature and Supreme self-Existence in Oneness) that is also an
artiÞcial legal person (noun) made only of words on paper that somehow consciously worships
Reality and the Nature of God as Its only Law even though it can think or do nothing by itself (as a
Þctional puppet)? This, in self-evidence, simply cannot be. All nations and all states are Truly and
without a doubt not of the Nature of GodÕs Creation, and therefore are always that which is against
christ, against the Son/Word/Law of Jehovah.

For all the gods of the nations are idols…

Can one live falsely in legal personhood under a legally (anti-God) indoctrinated municipal
corporation (artiÞcial person) and still be following the Word (Son) of God? Any man would be
hard-pressed to justify a yes answer to this question, and certainly would be foolish to attempt any
form of misinterpretation of this:
—=—

“What? know ye not that YOUR BODY IS THE TEMPLE of the Holy
Ghost WHICH IS IN YOU, which ye have of God, AND YE ARE NOT
YOUR OWN? For ye are bought with a price: THEREFORE GLORIFY
GOD IN YOUR BODY, AND IN YOUR SPIRIT, WHICH ARE GOD’S."
— 1 Corinthians 6: 19-20, KJB

—=—

!287
God is internal, while a person is always an external appearance not of Reality. God is never what
the mirror reveals. And while the body of man is the temple of God, to the gods of the nation, the
body of man is but a contracted surety for a commercial vessel of the state, the districted hu-man
capital of peopled, conquered (purchased) slaves. Thus, the man of God exudes the Law of God
from his temple, while the Þctional person of the state must follow its artiÞcial gods into oblivion.
And so perhaps the most important lesson we must understand is that, while the Law of God is
Highest and self-evident, only each of us as individual (undivided) bodies of christ (parts of a
whole) can express and enforce the Law of God by religiously following that Law. Thus, we are the
collective power of our own govern-ment. We control our own minds and actions. How we act and
the choices we make by re-action or by silence and inaction will determine the shape of our own
Existence and the health of this Garden that sustains us.

Nowhere in the scriptures do we Þnd any precedent where man should respect any person what-
soever lest it be a cursed action. Quite the contrary… And so how can man glorify God in body and
in Spirit if he has taken the artiÞcial body politic of another false god and stands in surety under
that other god’s “law of the land” (due process of legal law)?

To be clear, the temples of men built by hands are the false personiÞcation of the Real temples of
God, which we all are in our True harmony and spiritual awakening of mind, body, and soul:

—=—

“Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy THIS TEMPLE, and in
three days I WILL RAISE IT UP. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years
was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? BUT
HE SPAKE OF THE TEMPLE OF HIS BODY.”
—John 2: 19-21, KJB

—=—

Let us be clear, here, that the “law of the land” is the law of and created by the corporate body of
the false god entitled “the People,” and therefore the body politic of that private group of “the
People” is the collective god of the nation. E Pluribus Unum, out of many only one voice, one law,
one false god over legal creation.

Perhaps you might be wondering just about now the answer to a strange riddle: if the People
created, established, and ordained the law of the land as “due process of law,” then who is the
lower class of commonalty? Who is the general public as subjects to and under that private People?
Trust me, if you knew the answer to this question you wouldn’t desire to be a common, public
citizen-ship of the United States, and you certainly wouldnÕt worship its national ßag (Arms), that
ßag of the principal merchants and money-changers that turn your own holy temple of blood into
that which is a tainted adversarial to Jehovah and to your True Self. It should be self-evident that
man builds no kingdom unless he intends to enslave others under its authority.

COMMONALTY - noun - 1. THE COMMON PEOPLE. In Great Britain, all classes and
conditions of people, who are BELOW THE RANK OF NOBILITY. The commonalty like the
nobility, are divided into several degrees. In the United States, commonalty has no very
deÞnite signiÞcation. It is however used to denote THAT PART OF THE PEOPLE WHO
LIVE BY LABOR, and are NOT LIBERALLY EDUCATED, NOR ELEVATED BY OFFICE OR
PROFESSIONAL PURSUITS. 2. THE BULK OF MANKIND. (Webs1828)

—=—

!288
There are two types of “people.” There are those who Live by the fruit of their labor and there are
those whom, by a vampiric tax and fee (feud, a proprietary money and rent system), legally suck
the proÞts of every common manÕs labor into their own landed estates. And this is accomplished
via public citizen-ship. They are apparently noble in their piracy, yet take no titles of nobility by
law in the United States.

No, the American nobility is a secret society; a society built upon their own created, Þctional
fantasy of a secret. They are their own god, worshiping themselves in pagan deity.

When the public slave believes he is also the creator and master (the private People) of his own
debtorÕs prison, then a true voluntary, iniquitous debtorÕs hell has been established and ordained,
complete with the empty religion of patriotism. For the certiÞed ÒtrueÓ religion of this open-air
slave-colony America is that, Òthe PeopleÓ are
is a singular
singular voice
voice as
as aa pluralistic
pluralistic god,
god, their
their will
will be
be done,
done,
on earth as if it is heaven.

—=—

“That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the
power of God.”
—1 Corinthians 2:5, KJB

—=—

“No man ever believes that the Bible means what it says: He is always
convinced that it says what he means.”
―George Bernard Shaw

—=—

Ever notice that most of the evangelists on television, when not preaching in hypocrisy, are living
extravagantly wealthy and worldly lives of the ßesh, and are continually invoking their listeners
(victims) to pray for money? They urge us into the pursuit of more money (debt instruments)
knowing that in turn they themselves will receive it from us in some platitude of gratitude to that
sacred (cursed) god of money. They are spiritual defecators that misguide our intent from
spirituality and worship of God and Nature to the worship of mammon and all things artiÞcial.
They are controlled opposition used (permitted) by government not to exclaim the Word (Law) of
God but to promote the use of governmentÕs proprietary system of capitalism, representing its
pirate cove of human capital management. Amazingly, the scriptures that are delivered from the
mouths of these practitioners of evil are somehow magically twisted into the support of money,
usury, loans, and debt reduction. ThatÕs right, pray for a loan and ÒgodÓ will provideÉ

But which god?

Which ÒgodÓ gives and justiÞes loans of money at interest?

The signature of the Þctional person doing the borrowing deÞnitively answers that question.

The game of nations and of manÕs law is strictly the sport of slave (capital) management. The more
the slave can be made to volunteer his subjection the better and more proÞtable that human capital
management system will be. But this seemingly impossible power of persuasion can only happen
through the language arts. And so in history we Þnd a quite mutual consensus, that being the
secrecy of language as being the most powerful tool of tyrants. To reveal the true meanings of
words is the death of those who use words to enslave the spiritually dead.

!289
 —=—

"When the slave power predominates, religion is nominal. THERE IS

NO LIFE IN IT. It is the hard-working laboring man who builds the
church, the school house, the orphan asylum, not the slaveholder, as a
general rule. RELIGION FLOURISHES IN A SLAVE STATE ONLY IN
PROPORTION TO ITS INTIMACY WITH A FREE STATE, OR AS IT IS
ADJACENT TO IT."
—Archbishop John Baptist Purcell of Cincinnati, Ohio, 1863, excerpt from editorial in the “Catholic Telegraph”

—=—

“Gallup: Percentage of Christians in US Steadily Declining”

“Three-quarters of Americans identify with a Christian religion —

down 5 percent from the number who did so eight years ago, a new
Gallup poll shows. The survey, released on Christmas Eve, also found
20 percent of Americans have no formal religious identiÞcation — up 5
percent from 2008. According to Gallup, the percentage of Christians is
highest among older people — above 80 percent — and gets smaller
with each progressively younger age group;  62 percent of those 18 to 24
say they're Christian, while 31 percent say they have no religion.”
—Gallop Poll, excerpt from Newsmax article, December 2015

—=—

Note: no religion is equal to no agreed upon moral law. It leaves nothing to check the legal law of
man and allows for no escape from it. It is a personal state of learned ignorance as to the structure
of law, publicly declared.

A government that would actually seek for their members (citizens) to express a Higher form of
Law would do everything it could to cause this to happen, despite the fact that self-government by
men is against the best interests of any commercial state. It would thus provide an example, as that
of christ being the only True and self-evident example. So ask yourself this: what does government
do to set an example for you, for your children, and for future generations? If the reader is honest
with him or her self then such an allusive answer cannot be found, for the purpose of government
is commerce in mammon and nothing else. Religion is banned in public school. Mammon and its
monetary tools are opposed to Jehovah. It can be no other way.

What religion could this generation of mine and those younger than I possibly have when we have
been so detached from our very Source? What could possibly feel Real about any religion when
they themselves, as re-indoctrinated and self-serving artiÞcial persons (corporations), worship
merely the symbols, idols, and simulation of what is Real?

Ironically, this slave-state we call the United States is the self-proclaimed model of the world, label-
ing itself as the “land of the free.” And so it is certainly a truism that those who falsely believe they
are free are more hopelessly enslaved than those who at least know they are not. If the model of
freedom in this world is the United States, as Americanism, then is it any wonder religion has been

!290
made so nominal? Is it any wonder that the moral law has been put on the perpetual back-burner
with the spiritual Life it requires? A commonalty so out of touch with its God (Source/Nature)
cannot possibly even hope to resemble a spiritually religious (Lawful) society nor Þnd sanctuary
(immunity from the sanctions of law) in it, for a legalistic, civil life requires death of the spirit and of
course love of Þctional persons and false doctrines (legally created laws). It offers instead license
and credentials to break the Higher Law in an organized institution of controlled anarchy.

The historically controversial publication “Let’s Make A Slave” was a study and discourse of the
scientiÞc process of man-breaking and slave-making. It describes the rationale and results of the
Anglo SaxonsÕ ideas and methods of insuring the master/slave relationship. Its subtitle is publish-
ed as The Origin and Development of a Social Being Called ‘The Negro’ and is purportedly a work by
Willie Lynch, though its true origins (not its actual creation) are in question. Whatever its history, it
certainly gets the point across about controlling man through the control of language:

—=—

“How To Make A Slave”


“…CONTROLLED LANGUAGE”

“Crossbreeding completed, for further severance from their original beginning, WE MUST
COMPLETELY ANNIHILATE THE MOTHER TONGUE of both the new nigger and the
new mule, AND INSTITUTE A NEW LANGUAGE THAT INVOLVES THE NEW LIFE’S
WORK OF BOTH. You know language is a peculiar institution. It leads to the heart of a
people. THE MORE A FOREIGNER KNOWS ABOUT THE LANGUAGE OF ANOTHER
COUNTRY THE MORE HE IS ABLE TO MOVE THROUGH ALL LEVELS OF THAT
SOCIETY. Therefore, if the foreigner is an enemy of the country, to the extent that he knows
the body of the language, to that extent is the country vulnerable to attack or invasion of a
foreign culture. For example, IF YOU TAKE A SLAVE, IF YOU TEACH HIM ALL ABOUT
YOUR LANGUAGE, HE WILL KNOW ALL YOUR SECRETS, AND HE IS THEN NO
MORE A SLAVE, FOR YOU CAN’T FOOL HIM ANY LONGER, AND BEING A FOOL IS
ONE OF THE BASIC INGREDIENTS OF ANY INCIDENTS TO THE MAINTENANCE OF
THE SLAVERY SYSTEM. For example, if you told a slave that he must perform in getting out
“our crops” and he knows the language well, he would know that “our crops” didn’t mean
“our crops” AND THE SLAVERY SYSTEM WOULD BREAK DOWN, for he would RELATE
on the basis of what “our crops” REALLY MEANT. So you have to be careful in setting up
the new language; FOR THE SLAVES WOULD SOON BE IN YOUR HOUSE, TALKING
TO YOU AS “MAN TO MAN” AND THAT IS DEATH TO OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM. In
addition, THE DEFINITIONS OF WORDS OR TERMS ARE ONLY A MINUTE PART OF
THE PROCESS. VALUES ARE CREATED AND TRANSPORTED BY COMMUNICATION
THROUGH THE BODY OF THE LANGUAGE. A total society has many interconnected
value systems. All the values in the society have BRIDGES OF LANGUAGE to connect
them for orderly working in the society. BUT FOR (EXCEPT BY THE POWER OF) THESE
LANGUAGE BRIDGES, THESE MANY VALUE SYSTEMS WOULD SHARPLY CLASH
AND CAUSE INTERNAL STRIFE OR CIVIL WAR, the degree of the conßict being
determined by the magnitude of the issues or relative opposing strength in whatever form. For
example, if you put a slave in a hog pen and train him to live there and incorporate in him to
value it as a way of life completely, the biggest problem you would have out of him is that he
would worry you about provisions to keep the hog pen clean, or the same hog pen and make a
slip and incorporate something IN HIS LANGUAGE whereby he comes to VALUE a house
more than he does his hog pen, you got a problem. HE WILL SOON BE IN YOUR HOUSE.”

—=—

As we will learn, the entire structure of the law of nations (inter-national law) is to exclude the
public from entering into the house (land and property) of the private landholders (stakeholders).

!291
In other words, the language spoken by the districted common people of the United States (i.e.,
dog-Latin) cannot be mixed with the “higher” language of the landholders (land-lords) in the
foreign (private) States of “We, the People.” But I digress…

As we will explore in depth this word trickery and the Latin origins and etymology of our English
dog-babel later within this exhaustive, multi-volumed work, for now let us only contemplate one
lesson from this opprobrious appellation (name of reproach) of “dog-Latin” towards the very
language that we have been made accustomed to bark at each other in an utterance of circular
pointlessness like penned cattle.

We have no idea that we call each other by scurrilous names, speaking in an animalistic language,
thus treating each other only in consideration of the legal personiÞcation and public reputation we
are educated to be familiar with. We treat each other like Þctions (creations) of law, and thus bind
our ÒpersonalÓ interactions to that Þction and its legal law just as a cartoon character might be
bound by the laws of animation, moving and acting only as its animator (creator) draws and allows
it by a pre-determined script (law). This is to say that, while these word-smiths and practitioners of
the legal terms of art always fall back upon the original Latin (i.e., Roman) meanings of their artful
terms, we who struggle with the purposefully misleading English transliteration of that ancient
nomenclature of law in its “English” form are only like barking dogs attempting in vain to
communicate with their masters. The publicly franchised (free) slaves certainly may comprehend
one another by this dog-Latin in every day life (commercial debt-slavery). But we continuously fail
to be legally and ofÞcially (on the record) under-stood by those evil (legal) practitioners of law in
long black robes because we are merely speaking the slang of dog-Latin and not the more purist
form of Latinist legalese. Same words, different meanings… but similitude is not sameness. It is
certainly not that they do not comprehend what we are saying or why we are saying it. Instead,
they are purposefully pretending to listen while at the same time taking into consideration our
obvious and pre-planned illiteracy, secretly applying the true and ancient Latin and Greek
meanings to those artful words at bar. A judge does not hear or search for the common, vulgar
meanings of words, only the binding legal trappings that each common word translates to in legal
nomenclature. The artist works only inside his art, the magician within his illusions, the legal
wordsmith within the meaning and trickery of his proprietary words, using only the terms
(language) of that art. Everyone else is merely like a barking mad dog (animal).

BARK - It is sometimes Þguratively used to denote the MERE WORDS OR LETTER of an

instrument, or OUTER COVERING of the ideas sought to be expressed, AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM ITS INNER SUBSTANCE OR ESSENTIAL MEANING. "If the
bark makes for them, the pith makes for us." —Bacon. (Black4)

PITH - noun - 1. The soft spongy substance in the center of plants and trees. 2. In animals,
the spinal marrow. 3. STRENGTH OR FORCE. 4. ENERGY; COGENCY; CONCENTRATED
FORCE; CLOSENESS AND VIGOR OF THOUGHT AND STYLE. 5. CONDENSED
SUBSTANCE OR MATTER; quintessence. The summary contains the pith of the original. 6.
Weight; moment; importance. Enterprises of great pith and moment. (Webs1828)

—=—

Whatever words we bark at the judge, we hear his words in equally vulgar terms, even though the
weight of his words carries the pith of the law. Our obnoxious, droning bark only subverts us further
into the unwitting contractual relationship with the dis-ease of the artiÞce.

Does the cow, when it goes moo in its herd mentality, moo victory and demand from the farmer as
he provides his cattle (property) with a bail of hay, or is this the sound of a slave that knows what it
is? Does the honey bee create, harvest, and then gladly surrender its honeycomb and honey to their
keeper or is that buzzing a sign of malcontent and victimization? Does the slave in chains demand
a second portion of food from his brutal master or does he understand his disposition and beg?
And what of the mass of public citizen-ships without spiritual purpose and without a home (land)

!292
to walk upon of our own, our labor always employed for the beneÞt of the artiÞcial person that
uses us in contractual bondage and surety through our assigned US persons and ßattering,
educative, government-granted, legal titles? Which among these beasts listed here know True
liberty under God? Which ones do not suffer from a parasitic infection that cheats them out of their
own product of labor?

It is simply our own ignorance as to the nature of this foul language we are taught to commonly
speak in childhood that purposefully dumbs us down in consideration of the roots (etymology) of
the language and its Latin, Greek, and other supposedly ÒdeadÓ origins, as well as their use in the
various independent language arts. And with each art and its individual, often Þgurative terms, we
are constantly on the surface, beholding the form while never reaping the substance. In our chosen
vanity, we never regain what we allow to be captured by the mirror.

Even the common books we are privy to in public settings are vulgar, called anciently by the very
word that would be opposed to knowledge; that descriptive word of the satanist, the adversary to
enlightenment of the common slave.

ADVERSARIA - (From Latin adversa, things remarked or ready at hand.) Rough memoranda,
COMMON-PLACE BOOKS. (Black4)

ADVERSARIA - noun - [Latin from adversus. See Adverse.] Among the ancients, a book of
accounts, so named FROM THE PLACING OF DEBT AND CREDIT IN OPPOSITION TO
EACH OTHER. A COMMONPLACE BOOK. (Webs1828)

ADVERSE - adjective - [Latin adversus, opposite; of ad and versus, turned; from verto, to turn.
See Advert. This word was formerly accented, by some authors, on the last syllable; but the
accent is now settled on the Þrst.] 1. Opposite; opposing; acting in a contrary direction;
conßicting; counteracting; as, adverse winds; an adverse party. 2. Figuratively, opposing desire;
contrary to the wishes, or to supposed good; hence, unfortunate; calamitous; afßictive;
pernicious, unprosperous; as, adverse fate or circumstances. - verb transitive - adversÕ. To
oppose. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

SATAN - noun - [Hebrew. AN ADVERSARY.] The grand ADVERSARY of man; the devil or
prince of darkness; the chief of the fallen angels. (Webs1828)

—=—

Though hard to except, man is his own satan, his own adversary. Be it purposeful or accidental
misdirection, useful innocence, or outright intentionally published falsehoods, we sell each other
knowledge that is almost always adversarial to the True Nature of Life. We purposefully mislead or
cause stumbling blocks for those we may even intend to Òself-help,Ó leading each other away from
the only self-evident path of spiritual Truth and Law. The limited selection of any typical book-
seller is certainly proof that these are True statements. In fact, if youÕve gotten this far in this work
you are already way above the bell-curve of the common idiocracy, of a multitude that can barely
tolerate the patience required for a ten minute streaming online video.

Public school books and common libraries are full of these tomes of adversaria, also known as
ÒcommonplaceÓ or ÒscrapÓ books, as are the shelves of popular corporate booksellers and even at
grocery stores, sitting as Òready at handÓ as a common head of lettuce in the produce department.
They are the wisdom and doctrine of man alone, generally holding more the disposition of the
author in his or her opinions and perception of history than the essence of True knowledge.
Written, of course, in the common dog-Latin vernacular and thus steeped in such a helplessly
illiterate disposition, each of these adversaria promote the public-minded, common lifestyle by
which its government-approved publisher wishes to keep up the appearances of as normality. This
normalization (equalization) called loosely as the editing process is in fact the organized tainting of
all modern literature into its own form of oxymoronic, nonsensical, but ofÞcially declared-to-be true

!293
Þction (called by its masters as Ònon-ÞctionÓ). Be it through the exceeding vanity of the auto-
biography or the punishing embellishments of popular history, our access to anything not
adversaria is greatly and purposefully limited. Public television networks and movie studios ex-
pound on these always Þctional his-stories that stand as adversarial to knowledge and True
enlightenment, creating a trifecta of illiteracy within reßective imagery and behind special effects
and an auditory barrage of added, post-production sound effects and some expected soundtrack of
emotion-evoking music. And so we have on bookshelves an unbelievable and voluminous
multitude of public-minded ÒscholarsÓ calling themselves as the authors of history. And while each
may lay claim to having read hundreds or thousands of these adversaria books and are thus to be
respected as experts and professors of their own incapsulated ignorance, their uniquely
regurgitated information about their personal views of history are strewn about in the only
language they can possibly understand from birth; the dog-Latin of the goyim. And from the
language of the well-read slave comes the modiÞed, updated perspective of the modern dependent
of former slaves, repeating and plagiarizing the same fruit of that ever-so-fertile tree of useless
information. Among these are the university professors and students made up of common men,
who may only gain diplomas in adultery and bastardy, for the light of knowledge is covered by the
darkness of censorship by the state and the intentional illiteracy of the English language set. It is
the blind leading the blindÉ the devilÕs favorite cocktail of voluntary ignorance and the charming
but empty arrogance that attends such creators of ofÞcially accepted and peer-reviewed adversaria.

Meanwhile, True knowledge is kept out of mind and not Òready at handÓ as so much adversaria, but
is instead covered in mystery. It is kept under the rose…

As a result, as everything we know and each word we speak is in fact a false and Þctional re-
presentation of the Real, our words carry no meaning or authority because we know not the
meaning of our words. And through this organized word trickery, our ability to choose and our
actual intent is stolen away from us, swept under the carpet of that massive lingual nightmare.

—=—

"Ours is a mongrel language which started with a child's vocabulary of 300

words, and now consists of 225,000; the whole lot, with the exception of the
original and legitimate 300, borrowed, stolen, smooched from every
unwatched language under the sun, the spelling of each individual word of
the lot locating the source of the theft and preserving the memory of the
revered crime.”
—Mark Twain, Autobiography

—=—

"As early as the 15th century, scribes and early printers performed cosmetic
surgery on the lexicon. Their goal was to highlight the roots of words,
whether for aesthetic pizzazz, homage to etymology, or both. The result
was a slew of new silent letters. Whereas debt was spelled det, dett, or dette
in the Middle Ages, the 'tamperers,' as one writer calls them, added the b as
a nod to the word's Latin origin, debitum. The same goes for changes like
the b in doubt (dubium), the o in people (populous), the c in victuals
(victus), and the ch in school (scholar).”
—David Wolman, Righting the Mother Tongue: From Olde English to Email, the Tangled Story of English Spelling. Harper, 2010


—=—

!294
 —=—

"Rote learning is better swallowed when mixed with lessons in

etymology and the history of the language. Learning about etymology
can help with learning other languages, too. Take a simple word like
'justice.' You’ve probably known how to spell it for so long that you’ve
forgotten that the ending (spelling the sound 'iss' as 'ice') is
counterintuitive to a lot of children. Explaining that the word is
borrowed from French, however, might make it clearer. Sounded out in
French, the sound at the end makes a bit more sense (by analogy to a
place like Nice). A very brief explanation of this kind is a chance for a
short history lesson (FRENCH WAS SPOKEN AT THE MEDIEVAL
COURT IN ENGLAND) and a reminder that children already know a
lot more French than they realize. Teaching spelling in this way may
make learning it more interesting but also encourage creativity."

—Josephine Livingstone, excerpted from ‘Spelling It Out: Is It Time English Speakers Loosened Up?’ The Guardian [UK], October 28, 2014

—=—

Of course, the public education system is not designed to invoke such knowledge of lingual source.
For to teach man to be a public servant (subject of the United States) is to teach man how to act in
the character and persona of state property (under a legal person-hood). As Fredrick Douglas so
simply stated, knowledge makes a man unÞt to be a slave. Ingrained, learned ignorance of how to live
privately is a necessary tool for the public-mindedness of all common citizen-ships. No slave
(subject) is ever private, never acts in private, and only ever conducts the public business of his
master. This is the nature of the agency relationship, what we call public citizenship, for all agents
must have a principal (master), all trustees a truster. And so ignorance of the origins of words and
their use in the legal art is also kept from public school students, for this knowledge would surely
kill voluntary servitude to such a commercial master as the state (mammon), and the student
would actually question the very fact and source of his false, publicly founded education and the
language it’s built upon. Simply put, no man would ever choose to exist in public if he had the
knowledge of how to be the remainder in private, unless that man wished to commit acts against
moral rectitude, against the Natural Law, against all men by legally bestowed inequity, and
ultimately against Jehovah and his very own Nature, standing in opposition to that of all Creation
and Its Sacred, self-evident Word/Law.

The word public is directly opposed to that which is private. Thus a public education program
would be remiss to teach children about their ability to Truly Live in a private Life (independence)
without public needs (dependence). A federal citizen-ship is always a public (dependent) one. The
creator controls.

Interestingly, the word several, as a reference to the several States joined in union, means private
(not public). A several thing is simply a private thing. And so only the private men that are each
State (People of the territory/landholders) are free. If you have a social security number, a driver’s
license, any other form of public identiÞcation (status), or any type of insurance whatsoever, then
in no way is your legal status (persona) considered as private. In fact, the mere act of using a sur-
name (a publicly certiÞed, registered last name) is a public act in surety, for the surname is property
belonging to the state. It is the states creation, not God’s, and not yours. Like renting a car, the use

!295
of the registered, admixed surname means use of another’s property in agency to the principal
(master) of that name. This is voluntary servitude.

In its etymology, the word several comes from the early 15th century adjective, with the meaning of
“existing apart," from the Anglo-French several and Middle French seperalis for "separate," and from
the Medieval Latin separalis, from Latin separ "separate, different," a back-formation from separare
"to separate.” The meaning of "various, diverse, and different" is attested circa 1500; that of "more
than one" is from the 1530s, originally in legal use. To act severally (adverb) then is to act
"separately," a word from the late 14th century, stemming from several + -ly.

We are taught that the several states is one group (body) of states. In fact, this is incorrect. Each
state is several (separate), and thus private (foreign) from all others and from the United States
federal government (Washington D.C), which we also call colloquially as “the state.”

Thus, to act in a public (common) manner is to give up the right of severalty (privacy) in order to
conform to the whole body politic. Each State is private (several) with private laws that are
immune from federal (public) law. The United States through its District of Columbia is a public
jurisdiction of territory, under international public law. And so a citizenship of the United States is
a public person, while the “People” of each individual State that are not US citizens are acting
severally (privately). To be clear, a man can only be in the character of privacy or publicity, not
both. God or mammon? This comprehension is key to the whole game and its evil design, for a
man acting publicly cannot also act according to his scriptural, spiritual, and moral beliefs. The
public person (status) of any man is always under the strict legal law of the god of mammon. The
public law stands in opposition to the moral and/or private law of private men, requiring not only
their consent, but a publicly registered persona (commercial vessel).

This will all become abundantly clear as we move forward with this research. Remember, every
word counts, so ignore no word or concept as we continue.

Here we must comprehend that public school is designed to teach and indoctrinate (teach the
doctrine of) publicity (amoral law) to children for public life, so that we believe that we are the
character that is reputed upon us by the state, which we call the public person (citizen-ship).
Citizenship (volunteerism) and slave (forced captivity) are merely ßattering titles designed to pull a
hood of Þction over the eyes of man, where the false title is taken as Reality. We are so concerned
with our supposed public reputation (persona) that we lose touch with our own private Nature, of
our True Self and Its Source, so that our public persona takes over our perception of the Reality and
of the spirit of our Reason to Exist, and so that we are judged not by our actual moral character, but
by the reputation of our Þctional, commercial persona (its name, its number, its grades and
diplomas, its credit score, its insurable value, its future labor potential, its taxable income and
property, etc.) under the strict, legal (Roman pagan) law.

REPUTATION - ESTIMATION in which one is HELD, the CHARACTER imputed to a

PERSON in the neighborhood where he lives. General OPINION, good or bad, HELD OF A
PERSON by those of the community in which he RESIDES. IT IS NECESSARILY BASED
UPON HEARSAY. "CHARACTER" IS MADE UP OF THE THINGS AN INDIVIDUAL
ACTUALLY IS AND DOES WHEREAS "REPUTATION" IS WHAT PEOPLE THINK AN
INDIVIDUAL IS AND WHAT THEY SAY ABOUT HIM. In the law of evidence, matters of
PUBLIC and GENERAL interest, such as the boundaries of counties or towns, rights of
common, claims of highway, etc., are allowed to be PROVED BY GENERAL REPUTATION;
e.g., by the declaration of deceased persons made ante litem motam, by old documents, etc.,
notwithstanding the general rule against secondary evidence. (Black4)

—=—

So how do we know that the borders of the United States jurisdiction legally exist? Because a bunch
of dead, legally entitled persons and their old legal documents full of artful words say so, that’s

!296
why! What is constituted by the buried dead can only be respected by the living dead, the
spiritually dead men acting in the character of a legal, public (artiÞcial) life-form who have
abandoned God. It is the reputed legal nature (reputation) of these invisible borders that create
their seemingly Real but ultimately Þctional character, not the fact that they actually Exist in
Nature. God Creates no fences, borders, or territories. Only men who seek to be artiÞcial gods over
artiÞcial places (nouns) against GodÕs Nature re-create such conceptual things. They simply donÕt
Exist, you see. They are legal Þctions; deceits; simulations. They are only Þgments of the
imaginations of men; mostly dead men, in fact. And only public citizen-ships actually believe their
status is Real, for public education tells us they are a Reality. Border patrol police with guns of
course help to solidify the illusion along with the legal notion of ethnicity. But in Reality, men acting
dogÕswearing
in the character of citizen-ships are akin to dogs wearingshock
shockcollars,
collars,so
sothat
thatwhen
whenthey
theytry
tryto
to
cross those invisible borders of the dead without permission by the public authorities of all dead
persons, they are in for quite a shock. Yet we somehow believe we are Naturally free even in our
restraint (the distress/distraint of the district), and even while we are required to show passports
(papers of birth-origin and pedigree) to our masters. This is public-mindedness at is very core, as
taught in public school and through entertainment and custom.

Freedom is slavery…

It could be said that a border only prevents manÕs Þctional, legal person from passing that Þctional,
legal barrier called a ÒborderÓ upon a map. The Living man acting as surety for the legal (dead)
person is thus stopped in order to identify the legal person. In this way, Nature (man) is trapped
behind that artiÞce of name, number, reputation, and other false attributes of a legalized public
persona. He roams the jurisdiction bouncing between legal, invisible borders, and like a ghost
attempting to go through a wall while carrying something of this world, is stopped from passing
through by the burden of personhood he carries. A private man has no public person, no surname
or number of the state to get caught up in the realm of public matter.

In essence, these government-sponsored induction centers teach us not knowledge nor give us
tools to obtain it, but instead merely show us how to be-lieve; how to be put into a state of be-lief
that the Þction of law and government are a moral Reality with god-like authority. But an amazing
thing happens when we discover the True meaning of these seemingly easy-to-comprehend words.
What really is belief, and what is it to be made to believe in a legal (Þctional) thing as opposed to be-
lieving in God (Reality)? Why does the Bible exclaim speciÞcally that belief in money is the root of
all evil, and not just the false fact of the legal existence and commercial use of money itself?

Just what is it to be in a state of lieve?

LIEVE - For lief, is VULGAR. [See Lief.] (Webs1828)

LIEF - adjective - [See LOVE.] DEAR; BELOVED. [Obsolete.] - adverb - [supra. This word
coincides with LOVE, Latin lubet, libet, and the primary sense is TO BE FREE, prompt, ready.]
Gladly; WILLINGLY; freely; used in familiar speech, in the phrase, I had as lief go as not. It
has been supposed that had in this phrase is a corruption of would. At any rate it is
anomalous. (Webs1828)

SUPRA - A Latin preposition, signifying ABOVE, OVER or beyond. (Webs1828)

SUPERABLE - adjective - [Latin superabilis, form supero, TO OVERCOME.] That may be

overcome or CONQUERED. These are superable difÞculties. (Webs1828)

INSUPERABLE - adjective - [Latin insuperabilis; in and superabilis, from supero, to overcome or

surpass.] 1. THAT CANNOT BE OVERCOME OR SURMOUNTED; INSURMOUNTABLE;
as insuperable difÞculties, objections or obstacles. 2. THAT CANNOT BE PASSED OVER.
And middle natures, how they long to join, Yet never pass th' insuperable line. The latter
application is unusual. This word is rarely or never used in reference to any enemy, in the

!297
sense of invincible or unconquerable. We do not say that troops or enemies are insuperable;
but the word is applied chießy to difÞculties, objections, obstacles or impediments.
(Webs1828)

LOVE - verb transitive - luv. [Latin libeo, lubeo. See LIEF. The sense is probably to be prompt,
free, willing, from leaning, advancing, or drawing forward.] 1. In a general sense TO BE
PLEASED WITH; TO REGARD WITH AFFECTION, on account of some qualities which
excite pleasing sensations or desire of gratiÞcation. We love a friend, on account of some
qualities which give us pleasure in his society. We love a man who has done us a favor; in
which case, gratitude enters into the composition of our affection. We love our parents and
our children, on account of their connection with us, and on account of many qualities which
please us. We love to retire to a cool shade in summer. We love a warm room in winter. We
love to hear an eloquent advocate. THE CHRISTIAN LOVES HIS BIBLE. In short, we love
whatever gives us pleasure and delight, WHETHER ANIMAL OR INTELLECTUAL; AND
IF OUR HEARTS ARE RIGHT, WE LOVE GOD ABOVE ALL THINGS, AS THE SUM OF
ALL EXCELLENCE and all the attributes which can communicate happiness to intelligent
beings. In other words, the christian loves God with the love of complacency in his attributes,
the love of benevolence towards the interest of his kingdom, and the love of gratitude for
favors received. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with ALL thy heart, and with ALL thy
soul, and with ALL thy mind - Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Matthew 22:37. 2. To
have benevolence or good will for. John 3:16. - noun - 1. An affection of the mind excited by
beauty and worth of any kind, or by the qualities of an object which communicate pleasure,
sensual or intellectual. It is OPPOSED TO HATRED. Love between the sexes, is a compound
affection, consisting of esteem, benevolence, and animal desire. Love is excited by pleasing
qualities of any kind, as by kindness, benevolence, charity, and by the QUALITIES WHICH
RENDER SOCIAL INTERCOURSE AGREEABLE. In the latter case, love is ardent
friendship, or a strong attachment springing from good will and esteem, and the pleasure
derived from the company, civilities and kindness of others. Between certain natural
relatives, love seems to be in some cases instinctive. Such is the love of a mother for her
child, which MANIFESTS itself toward an INFANT, before any particular QUALITIES in
the CHILD are UNFOLDED. This affection is apparently as strong IN IRRATIONAL
ANIMALS AS IN HUMAN BEINGS. We speak of the love of amusements, the love of books,
THE LOVE OF MONEY, and THE LOVE OF WHATEVER CONTRIBUTES TO OUR
PLEASURE OR SUPPOSED PROFIT. THE LOVE OF GOD IS THE FIRST DUTY OF MAN,
and this springs from just views of his attributes or excellencies of CHARACTER, which
afford the highest delight to the sanctiÞed heart. Esteem and reverence constitute
ingredients in this affection, and a FEAR of offending him is its inseparable effect. 2.
Courtship; chießy in the phrase, to make love that is, to court; to woo; to solicit union in
marriage. 3. PATRIOTISM; THE ATTACHMENT ONE HAS TO HIS NATIVE LAND; AS
THE LOVE OF COUNTRY. 4. Benevolence; good will. GOD IS LOVE. 1 John 4:7. 5. The
OBJECT beloved. The lover and the love of human kind. 6. A word of endearment. Trust me,
love. 7. Picturesque REPRESENTATION of love. Such was his form as painters, when they
show their utmost art, on naked loves bestow. 8. LEWDNESS. He is not lolling on a lewd love-
bed. 9. A thin silk stuff. Obsolete. LOVE IN IDLENESS, a kind of violet. Free of love a plant of
the genus Cercis. (Webs1828)

BE - verb intransitive substantive, participle present tense - Being; participle passive been. [The
sense is to stand, remain or be Þxed; hence to continue. This verb is defective, and its defects
are supplied by verbs from other roots, as, is, was, were, which have no radical connection
with be. The case is the same with the substantive verb in most languages.] 1. To be Þxed; TO
EXIST; TO HAVE A REAL STATE OR EXISTENCE, for a longer or shorter time. Let this
mind be in you, which was in Christ Jesus. Philippians 2:1. To be contents his natural desire.
2. TO BE MADE TO BE; TO BECOME. And they twain shall be one ßesh. Math.19. Jeremiah
32:4. 3. To remain. Let the garment be as it was made. 4. To be present in a place. Where was I
at the time? When will you be at my house? 5. To have a particular manner of being or
happening; as, how is this affair? how was it? what were the circumstances? This verb is used

!298
 as an auxiliary in forming the tenses of other verbs, and particularly in giving them the
passive form; as, he has been disturbed. It forms, with the inÞnitive, a particular future
tense, which often expresses DUTY, necessity or purpose; AS, GOVERNMENT IS TO BE
SUPPORTED; WE ARE TO PAY OUR JUST DEBTS. Let be is to omit, or leave untouched; to
let alone. Let be said he, my prey. (As) a preÞx, as in because, before, beset, bedeck, is the
same word as BY. It is common to the English, Saxon, Gothic, German, Dutch, Danish and
Swedish languages. It occurs probably in the Russian, but is written po, as it is in possideo and a
few other words in the Latin. It denotes nearness, closeness, about, or, at, from some root
signifying to pass or to press. [See By.] That this word is the Shemitic, used as a preÞx, is
certain, not only from its general applications, which may be seen by comparing the uses of the
word, in the Hebrew for instance, with those in the Saxon; but from its use in particular
phrases, particularly in its use before the name of the Supreme being IN SWEARING.
(Webs1828)

—=—

If the reader has it in his or her capacity at this moment, I would encourage you to pause here and
go look up the modern deÞnition of the word love and belief/believe in any currently updated
dictionary. I ask this only to show the vast wealth of knowledge, speciÞcally scriptural or spiritual
knowledge, that today is purposefully absent from most ÒpopularÓ dictionaries. In other words,
many public lexicons are opposed to knowledge, thus in Reality merely common adversaria.
WebsterÕs intent should not be forgotten simply because this syndicalist government system wishes
to ban and lay to waste moral and religious checks and balances to its legal Þction (evil).

Christ, in his inÞnite Love for the Law of God without temptation or blemish, was insuperable.
Christ is the only Real super hero that any man can become.

As a defective verb, this signiÞes that the word be must be attached to another word. To be funny, to
be a name, to be enslaved. But under Jehovah, this is the only time we can just Be, as I am that I am.
To Be in Nature only is to Exist only In and Under God. But to pre-tend to be a public person is to
stand in abandonment of the Nature of simply Being. To Be is to remain whole. To pretend to be or
respect the false, legally created being of anything else is to foul or blemish GodÕs self-existent
Creation, as when we take GodÕs given, christian name in vain so as to bow to the authority of the
incorporated church and state.

We are either in Being as a verb (in action and in Reality under God) or we are portraying ourselves
as actors, as vulgar human beings, as a noun (in name only), acting by the legal name of another in
false persona; a strawman.

It is difÞcult I know, but at some time throughout this work the realization will hopefully pop into
each reader’s head that to love money is to be-lieve in, value, and use money as the god of all things,
valuing all things within its artiÞcial consideration. To love government is to believe in it, and such
a love of artiÞce is equal to the hatred of God (Reality). The manifestation of that love may not be
readily apparent until one looks at all he has or has not acquired through that love (belief) that all
things can be conquered (purchased) through money despite NatureÕs Design, from property to
possessions to job titles to diplomas to driver’s licenses and social security privileges to the very
bank notes that our registered birth certiÞcates are printed upon. Only the love (be-lief) of and in
money can accomplish this; that belief that we canÕt live without money because everything we see
around us only has value in some form of money. And yet we have nothing of the spirit (Source),
either of ourselves or of anything we value monetarily. Even Life Itself has an assigned, Þctionally
monetary price, and death carries a perverse, insurable prize. And this is the true nature of
mammon, for the love of money (mammon) is indeed the root of all evil. The spirit and soul of all
things is priceless; valueless under God, and man in Nature can do anything possible within and in
respect of Its Laws.

!299
To be clear, the love of money is the belief in the existence of its value. We can see a physical dollar
bill. What we cannot see (sense) is the imaginary value attached to it. We take it on faith, despite its
utter lack of self-evidence. This pretended valuation of all things in Nature that are the Property
(Creation) of God, including the price placed on a man’s head in slavery or employment, is the
essence of what is mammon.

Monetary values are only placed upon the legal names and titles of things, not the actual things
themselves. Thus a man labeled and styled as a “slave” has a certain value in money. But a man or
society with unlimited spending potential and perpetual legal permissions to act against Nature’s
Laws, collateralized by billions of voluntary slaves and their papered property who believe all
things carry with them a price (value) in mammon, is literally the manifestation of every terrifying
god in history, from Zeus’s electricity to Kali the Dark Mother and Destroyer’s atomic god particle.
The only things he will never have or Þnd is True Peace and Love and Charity, for these things
cannot be purchased from Jehovah their keeper. They must be lived. God respects no artiÞce, and
money is certainly the root of artiÞciality (evil).

While operating within this artiÞcial jurisdiction, which means to appear in the name or Latin nomen
of a government issued personhood (to manifest in the realm of evil, where no men of God are
allowed), man must assume the role of an artiÞcial thing (false persona) as well. Man must pretend
to become a cartoon within that cartoon world — for man (as God’s Natural Creation) Lives only in
the Reality of God’s Nature, while cartoons exist only in the Þctional realm of the animated dead Ñ
the artiÞcial creations and persons of man. The two realms never cross over, and man cannot claim
love (belief) of both. Thus a binding connection (legal attachment) must be made between these
two realms of Reality and Þction. The man acting in legal persona can live only a mortal (dead)
existence, for he must have a legally de-Þned name (proper noun), and it is only that name of the
legal, Þctional person that is legally (artiÞcially) controlled. The man Ñ the actual Living Temple
and vessel of God Ñ is thus bound in a state of artiÞcial being (legal ÒlifeÓ) that is willingly and
consensually bonded in surety to that Þctional name (person). Where the person goes, the man will
surely follow (in surety), and vice versa. For a pup-pet acts only as its master wills. And the
reputation of the person, which is manifested in name, number, and other identiÞcations, hangs
like a dark legal cloud wherever that man-in-persona may travel in legal character, for his travel is
restricted to only commercial activities (under commercial law) while he acts in the property
(commercial person) of another.

—=—

“By the status (or standing) of a person is meant THE POSITION THAT
HE HOLDS WITH REFERENCE TO THE RIGHTS WHICH ARE
RECOGNIZED AND MAINTAINED BY THE LAW — in other words,
his CAPACITY FOR THE EXERCISE AND ENJOYMENT OF LEGAL
RIGHTS.”
—James Hadley, ‘Introduction to Roman Law 106’ (1881), as quoted from (Black’s Law Dictionary 7th Edition)

—=—

Another term for this Þctional state of legal being (artiÞcial life) is to be a dummy. We’ve all heard of
the term dummy corporation, but we’ve likely never assumed this to be in reference to our own
personal incorporation to government! As it turns out, we are in-deed nothing if not a bunch of
dummies acting in agency…

DUMMY - noun - One who holds legal title for another; A STRAW MAN. (Black4)

!300
 DUMMY - adjective - Sham; make-believe; pretended; imitation. As respects basis for
predicating liability on parent corporation for acts of subsidiary, "AGENCY," "adjunct,"
"branch," "instrumentality," "dummy," "buffer," and "TOOL" all mean very much the SAME
thing. (Black4)

STRAWMAN - 1. A WEAK OR IMAGINARY OPPOSITION set up only to be easily

confuted. 2. A PERSON SET UP TO SERVE AS A COVER for a usually questionable
transaction. (Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary)

STRAWMAN - A FRONT, A THIRD PARTY who is put up IN NAME ONLY to take part in
a transaction. NOMINAL PARTY to a transaction; ONE WHO ACTS AS AN AGENT FOR
ANOTHER for the purposes of taking title to real property and executing whatever
documents and instruments the principal may direct. PERSON WHO PURCHASES
PROPERTY FOR ANOTHER to conceal identity of real purchaser OR TO ACCOMPLISH
SOME PURPOSE OTHERWISE NOT ALLOWED. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition)


STRAWMAN - 1. A FICTITIOUS PERSON, especially one that is weak or ßawed. 2. A

tenuous and exaggerated counterargument that an advocate puts forward for the sole
purpose of disproving it. — Also termed straw-man argument. 3. A THIRD PARTY used in
some transactions as a temporary transferee TO ALLOW THE PRINCIPAL PARTIES TO
ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING THAT IS OTHERWISE IMPERMISSIBLE. 4. A person hired
to post a worthless bail bond for the release of an accused. Also termed steaminess homo.
(Black’s Law Dictionary 7th Edition)

AGENCY - A RELATION, CREATED either by EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CONTRACT OR

BY LAW, whereby one party (called the principal or constituent) delegates the transaction of
some lawful business or the authority to do certain acts for him or IN RELATION to his
rights or property, with more or less discretionary power, TO ANOTHER PERSON
(CALLED THE AGENT, ATTORNEY, proxy, or delegate) who undertakes to manage the
affair and render him an account thereof. The contract of agency may be deÞned to be a
contract by which one of the contracting parties conÞdes the management of some affair, to be
transacted on his account, to the other party, who UNDERTAKES to do the business and
render an account of it. A contract by which one PERSON, with greater or less discretionary
power, UNDERTAKES TO REPRESENT ANOTHER in certain business relations. A
relation between two or more PERSONS, by which one party, USUALLY CALLED THE
AGENT OR ATTORNEY, is authorized to do certain acts for, or in relation to (LIE rights or
property) of the other, who is denominated the PRINCIPAL, CONSTITUENT, or
EMPLOYER. (Black2)

CONSTITUENT - A word used as a correlative to "ATTORNEY," to denote one who

CONTITUTES another his AGENT or INVESTS THE OTHER WITH AUTHORITY TO
ACT FOR HIM. ' It is also used in the language of politics, as a correlative to
"REPRESENTATIVE," the constituents of a legislator being those whom he represents AND
WHOSE INTERESTS HE IS TO CARE FOR IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS; usually the ELECTORS
of his DISTRICT. (Black2)

—=—

How do we know we are acting in public agency as dummies, where the US government is our
principal (master) and we its agents (voluntary servants)?

It’s really quite simple. We individually (in the appearance of a proprietary legal persona) and thus
legally pay and are required to pay taxes (extortion/protection money). To protect and serve, the
state must receive protection money (taxes) to pay for that offered protection and supposed service,
which is sometimes served at the barrel of a gun or from the bottom of a shiny black boot. But
remember, you have no right to complain, for it is your consented to public and equal right to

!301
receive such “services” under the law (US and municipal/local code) through the agency relation-
ship (public person-hood in commerce) you are voluntarily participating in. Again, don’t shoot the
messenger here. Examine and comprehend the implied contract. Read the law. What we want to be
true and what is True in a legal sense is usually at least this affronting to the moral senses. Moving
on…

Taxes are a sur-charge for use of a commercial entity (sur-name) for transacting business while
under “consumer” protections (insurance). You, as a living man of God, are not a “consumer.” This
is only a ßattering title placed upon the strawman for insurance purposes. The commercial name is
protected only if it uses public credit (the dollar) for public, legal tender. The intercourse is secure
and insured under surname only. And to be clear, all money, no matter in whose hand it lies, is
always property of government (its creator/god). A user is never an actual owner. Again, if you
owned it outright, you wouldn’t be paying taxes for the “right” to use it.

Taxes can only be applied by a principal to its agent, for the agent is operating the Þctional person
(legal status) belonging to the principal (government), and the principal charges taxation and fees
for that use. You would not be paying any tax in any way if you were not acting as some thing you
are not, as a public person (rented property). Your taxes are your account and rendering as the
undertaker of a public personhood (citizen-ship), a public ad-venture in a franchise of interstate
commerce. All commercial ships (vessels) have a log and manifest and pay taxes on their burden,
load and cargo in lading. Personal taxes are merely the diary of man’s commercial use of the state’s
person (ship), not dissimilar to a rental car contract.

But how can one best deÞne what ÒagencyÓ is when most of us have no inkling we are even a
participant in this agentic relationship with the United States or other district, never being fully
informed that we stand as publicly registered agents for service of process for the person (status) in
the citizen-ship we are assigned at the nativity event of our Þctional delivery and birth as a legal
entity?

In the 1960s, Dr. Stanley Milgram conducted experiments where he controversially uncovered this
“agentic" personality and how most people are susceptible to it. His experiment posed one stranger
as the dominant “teacher” against another stranger given the title of a subordinate “learner,”
whereas the learner would be shocked with increasingly more painful shocks through switches
controlled by the teacher delivered with each wrong answer. The experiment was designed to show
how far the random cross-section of common people would induce electric shocks upon a strapped
in subject when they suspected the non-consent, injury, or even death of the ßatteringly titled
“learner” in the next room. A majority of the “teachers” would indeed knowingly deliver these
shocks when told to do so by a “doctor” in a lab coat uniform, signifying a false but persuasive
symbolical Þgure of authority. Some would only continue if the doctor took full responsibility for
damage or death to the person called the “learner.” This was historically the most ambitious and
frightening scientiÞc test on personhood and agency, as to the uncovering of what men will do
when given ßattering titles of authority even as simple as Òteacher,Ó and are then mentally made
subjects of yet another seemingly higher authority. But the actions of these test subjects in a middle
state of authoritative power through agency were completely voluntary, being fully informed and
able to voluntarily quit the experiment whenever they felt the need or moral compunction, and
they were even paid before the test began with this foreknowledge of the ability to quit and keep
that pre-paid payment.

In the end, it was only ever the “teacher” that was the subject of the experiment, and the results
were shocking to the science community. Milgram summarized his experiments within a 1974
article in Harper’s Magazine entitled “The Perils of Obedience,” where he stated:

“The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say
very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment
at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inßict on another person
SIMPLY BECAUSE HE WAS ORDERED TO by an experimental scientist. Stark authority

!302
 was pitted against the subjects’ [participants'] strongest MORAL imperatives against
hurting others, and, with the subjects' [participants'] ears ringing with the screams of the
victims, AUTHORITY WON MORE OFTEN THAN NOT. THE EXTREME WILLINGNESS
OF ADULTS TO GO TO ALMOST ANY LENGTHS ON THE COMMAND OF AN
AUTHORITY CONSTITUTES THE CHIEF FINDING OF THE STUDY and the fact most
urgently demanding explanation. ORDINARY PEOPLE, SIMPLY DOING THEIR JOBS, and
without any particular hostility on their part, CAN BECOME AGENTS IN A TERRIBLE
DESTRUCTIVE PROCESS. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work
BECOME PATENTLY CLEAR, and they are ASKED to carry out actions incompatible with
fundamental standards of morality, RELATIVELY FEW PEOPLE HAVE THE RESOURCES
NEEDED TO RESIST AUTHORITY.”

—Stanley Milgram (1974), from: ‘The Perils of Obedience’ in Harper's Magazine. Abridged and adapted from Milgram’s ‘Obedience to Authority.’

—=—

In other words, common people lack self-governance under a voluntary, unenforceable, moral Law.
Most men acting in the agency of another, as a legal person in ßattering title, has no True Religion,
for a person (puppet) is not a Living man and has no spirit or control of its own. The puppet
controls the man standing in surety to the puppet. The man follows the law of persons, under the
law of agency. And whole militaries can be made to murder each other under this incredible
phenomenon of agency.

Milgram elaborated two theories that were summarized in the publication American Psychologist:

ÒThe Þrst is the theory of CONFORMISM, based on Solomon Asch conformity experiments,
describing the fundamental relationship between the group of reference and the individual
person. A subject who has neither ability nor expertise to make decisions, especially in a
crisis, WILL LEAVE DECISION MAKING TO THE GROUP AND ITS HIERARCHY. The
group is the person's behavioral model.”


ÒThe second is the AGENTIC state theory, wherein, per Milgram, ‘the essence of obedience
consists in the fact that A PERSON COMES TO VIEW THEMSELVES AS THE
INSTRUMENT FOR CARRYING OUT ANOTHER PERSON'S WISHES, AND THEY
THEREFORE NO LONGER SEE THEMSELVES AS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR
ACTIONS. ONCE THIS CRITICAL SHIFT OF VIEWPOINT HAS OCCURRED IN THE
PERSON, ALL OF THE ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF OBEDIENCE FOLLOW.’”

"A cognitive reinterpretation of Stanley Milgram's observations on obedience to authority,” American Psychologist 45: 1384–1385. 1990.

—=—

Once this “agentic” personality is established, it is obviously very hard to break the ingrained
pattern of personality and practice it creates. Thus the branding of citizenship and public-minded-
ness upon all children in each nation is part of the economy and society, from the school system to
enter-tain-ment. We literally grow up believing we are the Þctional persona assigned to us at birth;
the name, the number, and the titles. But in Reality, we are commercial agents for a principal
“dummy” corporation, our residential address actually a place of domestic (family) business.
Responsibility is replaced by insurance. Moral virtue is replaced by strict law. And Reality is
hidden behind several forms of artiÞcial matrixes and systems designed to create a sense of false
security. The strawman as a dis-ease is the avatar, the projected self image we play as actors in the
Þctional persona of that legal matrix, a silent weapon for a quiet war over our minds.

If in your mind it is difÞcult to comprehend this separate, Þctional persona and the fact that you are
acting in agency within it, just think of it this wayÉ if you can believe in the foolish personiÞcation
of God by the church into a personage and likeness of man, why can’t you imagine the same
personiÞcation of man into a Þctional character or citizen-ship of the state? If you are emotionally

!303
effected by watching cartoon characters on the magic screen, then what makes you think you are
not equally effected by the psychological imaginations of the Þctional legal personas of other men
and by your own actions in that false persona and agentic title?

—=—

“I feel I owe you an apology. We have a rule: we never free a mind once
it’s reached a certain age. It’s dangerous; THE MIND HAS TROUBLE
LETTING GO… As long as The Matrix exists, the human race will
never be free.”
—Line as read by Morpheus (the god of sleep), from the movie ‘The Matrix’

—=—

The creators of this legal Þction matrix code control our lives via suretyship to its registered
property. We are made to believe the character in persona we play is Real, just as the reßection in
the mirror may fool our sense of True Being, True Life. Through this property (personhood) we are
caused to be plugged in to its legal, commercial framework, that matrix of word-magic and
illusion, and so as if the chains were actually Real, we believe ourselves to be bound by the laws of
another’s property. We cannot seem to escape our own delusion.

The dangerous pride of this glad acceptance of such artiÞcial titles, personality, property, and
character is of course spoken of in the Bible, where it admonishes the proudness of men in their
receivership of false and unnatural things and pretended authorities over other men through such
artiÞcial means, which in Reality amounts merely to an abandonment of the only True Equity and
duty under the Law of GodÕs Creation of Nature. We abandon our True Selves and pretend with
false pride to be what we are not, what does not actually Exist:

—=—

“For WHO MAKETH THEE to differ from another? and what hast thou
that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou
glory, as if thou hadst not received it?”
—1 Corinthians 4:7, KJB

—=—

What can we possibly have obtained that was not a gift of Nature but the intangible Þctions of
manÕs legalistic i-magi-nations? What possible power can we have over any other man than by
ignorance of the self-evident Reality and Law of our own Nature; that same harmonious Source of
Life that gave to each of us the Equality of our very Existence within It? What proudness should we
have pretending to be something we are not and that does not Exist in our own Nature? How can
one be proud of one's participation in the mass murder of war or the job-related killing and
mutilation through the policing of other legally classed ÒequalÓ persons (debt slaves) simply by
claiming the given, false authority of any badge, ßag, or banner? For to appreciate such super-
Natural (above Nature), artiÞcially gained powers by such legal means and ßattering titles is to
DIS-respect the True Nature of Life by avoiding our negative duty to all men and All of Creation
under the Natural Law. All power is illusion, just as all subjection to artiÞcially gained power is to
act in delusion, voluntary or not, consensual or not. No consent by any man gives any other man
an actual (negative) right in Reality to harm that man, for it is always the First Law and self-evident
Duty under God to never do no harm without Pure necessity as your reason. But the legal law, as

!304
the devilÕs tool of transporting us into a Þctional DIS-position, the contractual relationship, destroys
necessarily that Highest binding duty and vow to God as the foundation of the Natural Law,
causing he who contracts to become an agentic slave bound by a false law and oath to Þction and to
its creative and administrative gods, into forced obligations of someone elseÕs doctrinal words of
art, and under the forced judgement by other men (judges) sitting in ßattering titles and dressed in
ceremonial nonsense. These falsely given titles can only re-present man according to some Þctional
disposition of either an exaltation or repression of the vital statistics (words) of his very own
Source, his True Self, and only by respect of that which is adversarial (satanic) to our actual Source
of Existence. For men are only born equal in Nature, and their Equality Exists nowhere else. All
sources of artiÞcial status and ßattering title serve only one purpose Ñ to elevate (appoint/elect) or
conquer (purchase) one man or type or status of man over and/or under all others. This is against
the Design of Nature. For only in manÕs own respected Þction can the weak defeat the strong by
allowing evil (artiÞce) to trump over good (Reality).

Fiction of law is the very essence of the legal doctrines of principal and agent and of master and
servant. This agency relation-ship will be referenced throughout this work as it is the epitome of
what this debt-slavery compact of citizen-ship is, a vessel of indenture. For now, just remember that
the United States (a foreign, municipal corporation styled as ÒWashington DCÓ and not located in
any actual State) is the principal (and thus master) of all its citizen-ships (subjected vessels required
to be in servitude to anotherÕs Arms). The men in agency to that commercial vessel (franchise), who
hold and carry a public citizen-ship as a mark of pre-tended legal id-entity, are the registered
agents for service of process in that relation-ship (men acting as dummies, re-presenting the person
and legal status as property of another) and so must follow the law of owner of that
the owner property,
of that property,
which is again the United States.

To use an example in science Þction, consider the screenplay of The Matrix. The man is Free until he
plugs in to the artiÞcial construct (the world). By doing so he becomes an agent to the principal
governing force (the architect/creators) of that matrix simulation. When he appears within that
simulation (jurisdiction) he appears in the person created for him by the principal, by the
simulation, and so may only access the pleasures and artiÞce of that matrix in agency to that false
persona. His laws and actions are bound by the laws of the false persona he appears and acts
within, just as it is in the legal systems of the nations. The only difference is that there is no physical
device, no plug, except in the mind. And the ÒagentsÓ as the special police in suits and ties are the
protectors of the artiÞce, of the simulation and its artful law, though each of us are Òpotential
agentsÓ because we are trained to screw each other over as a public lifestyle. And in the legal
matrix, certainly nothing is private.

And this is why the police catchphrase is Òto protect and serve.Ó

They protect the principal from its agents and serve process and summons to those registered agents
(dummies) to appear falsely (in person) on behalf of the principal or third party. The master, with
authority and violence, summons its own demons (Þctional persons) to appear before it in its court
(legal realm of jurisdiction) because the legal person (status) is property of the legal master
(principal). It summons not free men, but the man acting as agent of the person (citizen-ship) of the
principal (government), for which the man in the bond of surety must appear as in persona (in the
surname of State-property) or as the agent thereof when required (summoned) by its principal. We
operate in the person (property) of government, and so we must appear as such (in the name) when
required, as the registered agents for service of process. This surety relationship guarantees that the
man himself acting in the character of legal personhood will appear before the administrative
ofÞcer (magistrate god) of the rented person (status). In this way, the man believes in and therefore
appears in a Þctional re-presentation of himself. The man believes that he is indeed the Þctional
persona he appears as. He loves (believes in) the artiÞce (evil) even more so than in himself.

If the person were a physical vessel instead of an imaginary one, say like a Chevy truck, then all of
this would be simple and hardly demand such an intensive discourse. The difference between man

!305
and his person (vessel) would be self-evident. And so the invisible chains of personhood must be
meticulously examined for the Þctions they are.

Inversely, agents (men as surety for public citizenships) are also called constituents in their lower
class because they allow others to act as their representatives (agents/attorneys). We foolishly elect
dummies (agents) to the legislature by our own consent through the corporate voting franchise. But
most importantly, all of our actions in citizen-ship to the United States (our principal) are under
that agency relationship (citizen-ship) and therefore legally under the interstate commercial juris-
diction of the districts of the Federal government. Our actions are false, imaginary, artiÞcial; con-
ducted in the art form of legality and money (mammon). Thus the federal law always trumps any
state law, as we are only temporary residents in any foreign State (third party) to the United States
(District of Columbia), including the “several” private States and their body politic legal state
governments (third persons/corporations). As the permanently domiciled agent in citizenship to
the United States, a United States person is a foreigner in every other nation, country, state, etc.
And so in this agency relationship, as a United States citizen, the individual state where my person
temporarily resides without domicile and without land is only a third party to any commercial
transactions I participate in, my business being done on behalf of my principal. US persons are
under US law, unless no national law exists in certain matters at bar. Public persons are Federal
persons. Private persons are not under federal law because they have no national persona
(artiÞcial, rented character) for which they act as surety for. No agent, no serviceÉ The federal law
cannot apply to anything private and several (separate) to it, for the law of the federal gods can
only apply to federal things that the federal government creates, all of which are commercially
considered and thus public. Citizenship is a federal, public ad-venture.

Another word for private and several is foreign. A private citizen of a State (People) is a foreigner to
the United States and to all other of the 49 States (private Peoples) not his own. A United States
citizen-ship (commercial vessel/public person) is always a foreigner in any of the 50 private
(several) States, allowed to have only a temporary residence therein and only by federal govern-
ment permission (visa).

For those having a rather difÞcult time processing this Þctional, legal status game called agency, let
us be clear in regard to how the state explains this agency relationship in the incorporation of legal
marriage. As we will Þnd out, a legal marriage is as all other legal things and conditions a false one,
designed in trickery to appear as genuine while laying in artiÞce (a legal lie). Even the word family,
from familiarity, as we will see shortly, is a false legal status that can mean multiple states of
artiÞcial being. Nothing is spiritually sacred when legalized into artiÞciality, only cursed. Evil can-
not be good. Death cannot be Life. A legal marriage is nothing more and nothing less than an
incorporated business in the eyes of the State. The marriage is not between two Creations of God,
but only between two Þctional persons, which are two legal creations (subjects) of the state
(principal). Only the creator can bestow license to merge two of its own corporations (surnames)
into one. Men of God need not apply, for God respects no legal thing, place, or person (name).
Remember, the word family can only ever mean a joint-commercial “business” in the eyes of the
state. There is no Life there; no Real sense of Family. And what it is that constitutes (establishes) a
“legal” family is the only authority in law of that family when legally considered under the state.
The home, as we shall see, in law and for public citizen-ships holding mere residence in a foreign
state (but with domicile only in the US jurisdiction), is just a word for business. Franchise.

—=—

“It is settled that that is to be considered the HOME of each one of us

where he may have his HABITATION AND ACCOUNT-BOOKS, and
where he may have made an establishment of his BUSINESS.”
—CONSTITUTUM ESSE EAM DOMUM UNICUIQUE NOSTRUM DEBERE EXISTIMARI, UBI QUISQUE SEDES ET TABULAS HABERET,
SUARUMQUE RERUM CONSTITUTIONEM FECISSET. Dig. 50,16, 203. (Black4)

—=—

!306
Our business is established as the federally registered address where we are legally registered as
agents for service of process, where we conduct our primary business in agency and in contract
with and on behalf of the state (principal), also known as raising a family. In these doctrines of the
legal (artiÞcial) family, the word business means commerce, and speciÞcally Òinterstate commerceÓ
under United States Law.

We must remember to always attempt to view ourselves through the Þctional eyes of the other side
of the mirror, taking into speciÞc consideration and purview the designs of our adversary, so that
we may comprehend the DIS-positional burden we legally hold as a contracted dis-ease under that
adversarial state. We must view ourselves as the enemy does if we are ever to understand and de-
feat that enemy… a rule second only to know thyself.

In the end, to know thyself is to know thy enemy, for the True enemy of Self is the belief (love) of
Þction and of lies, to know what is a lie and to still participate in it as if it were a Natural Truth.

FAMILY CAR DOCTRINE - The doctrine rests upon the basis that the automobile is
furnished by the husband in his individual capacity and as common-law HEAD of the
family for the use of the family, and NOT AS THE AGENT OF THE COMMUNITY. It rests
on theory that OPERATOR IS HUSBAND'S AGENT and runs automobile in husband's
ÒBUSINESSÓ; THAT WIFE IS HUSBAND'S AGENT IN CARRYING OUT ONE OF THE
PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE AUTOMOBILE IS PURCHASED AND OWNED. Under the
doctrine, a father furnishing automobile FOR PLEASURE AND CONVENIENCE OF
FAMILY MAKES THE USE OF AUTOMOBILE BY FAMILY HIS BUSINESS and any
member of family driving automobile with father's EXPRESS OR IMPLIED consent IS THE
FATHER'S AGENT and the father is liable for the MEMBER'S negligence. See, also, Family
Automobile Doctrine and Family Purpose Doctrine. (Black4)

FAMILY AUTOMOBILE DOCTRINE - The doctrine is that one who owns and maintains an
automobile FOR THE GENERAL USE OF HIS HOUSEHOLD makes use of automobile for
such purposes A PART OF HIS BUSINESS so that any member using automobile for those
purposes under general authority to do so BECOMES HIS REPRESENTATIVE, for whose
negligence he is responsible. It is an extension of the principle of respondeat superior to the
relation created by operation of family use automobile. See, also, Family Car Doctrine and
Family Purpose Doctrine. It is based on theory that members of family were engaged in A
JOINT ENTERPRISE or THAT CHILD WAS AGENT OF PARENTS. If an automobile is
owned and maintained by A FAMILY CORPORATION for general use of a family, such as
that of corporation's manager and one of its principal stockholders, corporation may be held
liable under the "family automobile doctrine" to third parties. (Black4)

FAMILY CAR - Automobile used to send owner’s children to school was "family
car.Ó (Black4)

MEMBER - One of the PERSONS constituting a FAMILY; A PARTNERSHIP, association,

CORPORATION, guild, etc. One of the persons constituting a court, a legislative assembly,
etc. A PART or organ of the animal body; especially a limb or other separate part. (Black4)

FAMILY PURPOSE DOCTRINE - A doctrine that the owner of a car, who gives it over to the
use of his family and permits it to be operated by the MEMBERS thereof, is liable for the
injuries inßicted while being operated by a MEMBER of the family. The doctrine, that the
owner of an automobile purchased or maintained FOR THE PLEASURE OF HIS FAMILY is
liable for injuries inßicted by the machine while being used by the MEMBERS OF THE
FAMILY for their own PLEASURE. The doctrine imputes RELATIONSHIP OF PRINCIPAL
AND AGENT where one maintains an automobile for pleasure or other USE OF MEMBER
of his family. It is based on theory that each family member in using such car for own
pleasure is carrying out the purpose for which it is furnished, AND IS THE OWNER'S
AGENT OR SERVANT. IT IS FOUNDED UPON PRINCIPLES OF AGENCY OR OF

!307
 MASTER AND SERVANT. It is restricted to automobiles maintained by owner for comfort,
pleasure, and convenience of members of his family. A father is not liable merely because
he is head of family, but the one who owns or provides the automobile is liable. A wife may
be held liable for the torts of her husband under the doctrine. AGENCY IS THE VERY
GENESIS OF THE DOCTRINE. Grandmother standing in loco parentis to grandson was liable
under the doctrine for grandson's negligent operation of her automobile. Where wife owned
automobile, husband was not liable under "family purpose doctrine," for minor son's
negligent operation of the automobile, notwithstanding husband paid part of gasoline and
garage bills… (Black4)

FAMILY RELATION - A relationship which may exist between one taken into the family by
the head of the family, NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABSENCE OF BLOOD RELATION-
SHIP OR OF LEGAL ADOPTION. Such relation exists: between two sisters when there is
moral obligation on part of one to support and care for the other and when necessity for such
care and support exists, when child receives from parent services, maintenance, or gifts reason-
ably frequent to lead to expectation of future enjoyment thereof, where brother owes moral
obligation to support sister and necessity for such support exists, where father lives on home-
stead after mother's death with two adult sons, his only heirs, one of whom marries and re-
mains on with father until father's death, where there is legal or moral obligation on head of
family to support the other MEMBERS, and there is dependence upon such members for
support. (Black4)

FAMILY GROUP - Within purview of the family car doctrine, is not conÞned to PERSONS
related to the owner, but includes members of THE COLLECTIVE BODY OF PERSONS
living in his household for whose convenience the car is maintained and who have
AUTHORITY to use it. The children of trust settlor including an adult son are MEMBERS of
the settlor's "family group" for income tax purposes. (Black4)

FAMILY USE - That use ordinarily made by and suitable for the MEMBERS of a household
whether as individuals or collectively. The supply of water in a MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION FOR FAMILY USE includes the supply of jails, hospitals, almshouses,
schools, and other municipal institutions; id. (Black4)

—=—

Whatever your own idea of what “family” is, being at its source an interpretable word, I assure you
that the state (eye of the beholder) does not agree with your vulgar opinion. It cannot. For it can
only see Þction. Its family is only its own artiÞcial creation; its corporation (body politic). Thus a
municipal corporation (city, county, or district) is also to be considered ONLY as one big happy
family (corporation) of Þctional strawmen members. The state (district) is the legal father (god) of
all legal things, just as Jehovah is known as the Father (God) of all of Natural Creation. This again
is just part of the aspect ratio of two opposing forces, heaven and hell both trying to exist in the
same space. Matter and anti-matter. The artiÞcial and the Real, as art gobbling up its Model.

You see, it is not that a family can actually be a corporation in Reality (in Nature), it is that all legal
(artiÞcial) marriages are only ever, legally speaking, federal incorporations of “natural
persons” (property) of the state. Perspective is everything! A legal family is only ever a corporate
(artiÞcial) one. And so we must here distinguish the word family between its spiritual, general, and
opposing legal meaning, knowing from this point forward that the state only and always considers
marriage in the capacity of a contract of incorporation in agency by two legal persons (servants),
and only after permission and license by the principal (master).

You could say that Satan (legal adversary) breaks up the True spiritual family unit in Nature and
under a vow to God by offering the contractual “marriage” in the trickery of a familial relationship
with the Þctional state. Intention must always be wavered and misdirected, while True Love is
systematically replaced by false be-lief in the state and its persons (legal status).

!308
Sorry folks, but legal marriage is a sham. It is of legality, not Reality. It holds no spiritual aspect. It
is not a Creation of or in honor of God, for legal things are always opposed to God’s Nature.
Marriage is a legal creation and permissive incorporation of the state and its property (surnames).
It’s just business; a commerce in spiritually dead, incorporated souls. What is legal is not of God,
not of Nature. If ever we are going to be able to comprehend just what voluntary slavery and
servitude is and how we participate freely within that legal matrix of false existence in this agency
relationship, then we must always, in every facet of Life, consciously distinguish between Reality
and Þction. We must always see the lie for what it is. Marriage by state license is and can be no-
thing else but legal Þction between two Þctional persons. It is literally a state of legalized adultery
(sin). God and Nature are wholly absent.

To be clear, this legal doctrine of head of household certainly stems from the scriptures:

—=—

“For the woman which hath an husband IS BOUND BY THE LAW TO

HER HUSBAND SO LONG AS HE LIVETH; but if the husband be
dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.”
—Romans 7:2, KJB

—=—

Unfortunately, the rule makes no exceptions between spiritual and legal matters. The hu-man (fool)
that suffers her good christian name to Þrst be placed into and under the artful authority of a legal
addition in surname to a false god (the state) has already fallen from God’s Law and Realm, and so
the Natural Law cannot protect her. And by further enjoining the state’s legal name in corporation
(bond) with another man’s persona (legal name) also under such false, legal persona (mask), she
has erred twice in her choice to be wed and married to artiÞcial things. Two persons (statuses) are
legally morphed into one corporation, and a legal Òwo-manÓ is always inferrer under the law to
any legally male Òman.Ó A Òwo-manÓ is always property (a creation) of the state. For Òwo-men"
don’t Exist in Nature, only in legal form within the legal realm of men. Woman is a legal status, a
ßattering title, not a Creation of God. Male and female men may be equal under God, but the
legally created status of men and women will never be.

This is not racist. This is not sexist. This is not good or evil. This is not fair or unfair.

This is legalism. This is what is adversarial (satanic) to God’s Nature. This is the legal matrix.

Woman is adversarial to man, just as human is adversarial to man. It is to take a form and legally
created status that is not of Nature, but of only Þctional qualities. The essence of any woman is as a
person (mask, status), not a Living man of God. There simply are no women of God, for to be
woman a man must accept that legal term against the foundational Law, which says one should
never believe oneself to be some thing (name/title/noun) one is not. The empty, unregenerate form
of man is human. Woman-hood is an agency of legal personhood in commerce under mammon,
not a Creation of God. Woman is a Þction. And it is this very desire to be set apart from the male of
the species, to be less ambiguous (less christ-like, immune from words) and more proprietary
(known by words and titles of ßattery) in a legalistic ofÞce (hood) that is the root of inequity be-
tween all men (male and female). Still don’t get it? Well, then answer me this:

ÒWomanÕs rightsÓ are certainly not for all men, now are they?



But then Òequal rightsÓ arenÕt for all men, either. For he who receives such legalized Òequal rightsÓ
will be the Þrst in line to call any outsider an illegal person or alien so as to forcibly, militarily, and
by law deny all other men (non-public persons) the same, artiÞcial, legal rights they so enjoy acting

!309
as prostituting agents, as legal persons. And all this because they aren’t wearing the same, in-
tangible, invisible, artiÞcial mask as we are in our strawman persona. We are as slaves erecting a
fence to keep other slaves away from our table scraps and straw beds, loving our captivity and
servitude and wage-slavery so much that we will kill to protect it. We will let starve and die pain-
fully a billion neighbors to ensure our place and status in this debtor’s hell.

The Truth, perhaps, is that we are exactly where we deserve to be… Bad men are supposed to go to
hell, after all, says the church. But they never tell you that this legal hell is here, now, on earth, now
do they, but instead support it and its corporate law of the land over that of God’s Law of Nature?

For many reading this, especially to those who have been searching some time for these elusive
answers, the above court opinion (legal deÞnition) by the administrative, magistrate gods with
regard to driving the family to school in the “family car” as being a business venture in a
commercially driven agency relation-ship should clear up a whole lot of questions. For others new
to this information and who have never thought to ask why license is needed for seemingly non-
commercial actions such as dropping the kids off at school or picking up some groceries, my
empathy goes out to you even as the many fallacious bubbles burst around you and Reality is
allowed to seep through the illusionary haze of legalism. It is like waking up as a cartoon in Reality,
to Þnally see what is outside the magic screen, knowing that you cannot actually Exist there. Yet
there you somehow lie.

But remember, only names (nouns) are legally incorporated (married). There is no agency without
the incorporation of the christian, given Þrst name and the State-issued surname as last (supra/
higher in authority) name. If you believe that the cartoon characters named ÒMickyÓ and ÒMinnie
MouseÓ can actually be married in Reality outside of their Þctional cartoon realm (artiÞcial juris-
diction), then perhaps this imaginary slavery in agency suits you and your imagination. But for
those who wish to see this legal matrix for what it is so as to escape such institutionalized false-
hoods of public, civil law, let us continue through this fractal of deceitful nomenclature.

To be clear, in order for evil men to assume the roles of legal “gods” so as to become the controller
of all things living and non-living upon the Earth (all of GodÕs Creation in Nature), men pretending
to be gods must give a name (nomenclature) to all those things, including to all of the men he (the
legal god) wishes to subjugate (objects turned into subjects). He must create dummies; a house of
intangible wax Þgures as legal person-hoods inhabited by subjects. The substance of the subject
(man) must be covered by an invisible, intangible wax (personiÞcation), so that only the false wax
persona is respected; only that corporate vail and title of the legal dummy is used. The false gods
must trick man into incorporating the Living soul with the dead persona; the Real with the artiÞcial;
as Nature and Þction contractually enjoined together into one incorporated body politic. This is the
unnatural relation-ship that we call as an agency, where man acts in the dummy person (strawman)
of another. And it is only this dummy (surname) that getÕs married, not the actual man.

—=—

“…I know thy works, that THOU HAST A NAME THAT THOU
LIVEST, AND ART DEAD.”
—Revelation 3:1, KJB

—=—

Living as a dead personÉ the legal, Þctional second self.

This work is the story of that cocoon-like state of our individual and collective false-persona of
being, and is the result of many years of painstaking research and consideration. It is being written
with hopes of a future metamorphosis of man, by cracking the code that encloses manÕs mind,

!310
body, and soul within this artiÞcial shell of Þction, causing us all to act against our very Nature and
self-interest. These legal names and surnames are recorded and registered (taxed), redeÞning man
as a Þctional character under legal law and therefore no longer of GodÕs realm of Nature. And this
means that his Natural (unalienable) rights no longer apply, for he is not acting as himself, and that
the Law of God as the Highest Natural Law is ignored through and because of his voluntary
participation of the man in the Þction (evil) of artiÞce.

The dictator dictates the diction of the Þction through addiction.

The word addiction is a perfect example of a common (vulgar) word that has a distinct legal (higher)
meaning from its general nomenclature as a Òterm of art.Ó The low (not supra), vulgar meaning of
this English language (dog-Latin) word refers generally to a physical addict of drugs or other
substances, and we generally (publicly) know only this meaning for that word. But the legal
language is not literal, and so we must remember that the words used in the arts are never in
regard to the Reality (GodÕs True Design and Nature) of things, and instead only to the status of
artiÞcial things and concepts. And so we must break this word ad-diction down into its component
parts and follow the legal path (pathos/dis-ease) to which it directs us, without the preconceived
and educationally engrained public, mean and low concepts induced into us from childhood and
through this word magic of sigils we call the English language; of purposeful illiteracy. For within
the word ad-diction we Þnd the key to citizen-ship; to legalized, voluntary servitude without
contemplation of our express act of volunteerism. For voluntary slavery is alive and well in the
United States, despite the public history presented by public government institutions to the
common, hive-minded public.

To be in ad-diction to a legal persona is to be in love (be-lief) of the Þction (evil), to be judged

(doomed) by the status assigned to the strawman at birth.

DICTION - noun [Latin, to speak.] Expression of ideas by words; STYLE; MANNER OF

EXPRESSION. (Webs1828)

AD - A Latin preposition, signifying to. It is probably from Heb. Ch. Syr. Sam. Eth. and Ar. To
come near, to approach; from which root we may also deduce AT… (Webs1828)

ADDICTION - noun - 1. The act of devoting or giving up IN PRACTICE; THE STATE OF

BEING DEVOTED. His addiction was to courses vain. 2. AMONG THE ROMANS, a
making over goods to another by sale OR LEGAL SENTENCE; also AN ASSIGNMENT OF
DEBTORS IN SERVICE IN THEIR CREDITOR. (Webs1828)

ADDICTED - participle passive - DEVOTED BY CUSTOMARY PRACTICE. (Webs1828)

ADDICTIO - In the Roman law, the giving up to a creditor OF HIS DEBTOR'S PERSON by
a magistrate; also the transfer of the (deceased) debtor's goods to one who assumes his
liabilities. (Black4)

DEVOTED - participle passive - Appropriated BY VOW; solemnly set apart or dedicated;

consecrated; ADDICTED; GIVEN UP; DOOMED; consigned. (Webs1828)

CONSIGNED - participle passive - DELIVERED; COMMITTED FOR KEEPING, OR

MANAGEMENT; DEPOSITED IN TRUST. (Webs1828)

DEDICATED - participle passive - DEVOTED TO A DIVINE BEING, or to a SACRED USE;

consecrated; appropriated; GIVEN WHOLLY TO. (Webs1828)

EXPRESSION - noun - The act of expressing; the act of FORCING OUT BY PRESSURE, as
juices and oils from plants. 1. The act of uttering, declaring or REPRESENTING; utterance;
declaration; REPRESENTATION; AS AN EXPRESSION OF THE PUBLIC WILL. 2. A phrase,

!311
 or mode of speech; as an old expression; an odd expression. 3. In rhetoric, elocution;
DICTION; the peculiar manner of utterance, SUITED TO THE SUBJECT and sentiment.
NO ADEQUATE DESCRIPTION CAN BE GIVEN OF THE NAMELESS and ever varying
shades of expression which real pathos gives to the voice. 4. In painting, a natural and lively
REPRESENTATION of the subject; as the expression of the eye, of the countenance, or of a
particular action or passion. 5. In music, the tone, grace or modulation of voice or sound suited
to any particular subject; that manner WHICH GIVES LIFE AND REALITY TO IDEAS AND
SENTIMENTS. 6. Theatrical expression is a distinct, sonorous and pleasing pronunciation,
accompanied with action suited to the subject. (Webs1828)

—=—

Popes, kings, presidents, and judges are considered in the legal (artiÞcial) realm as divine beings
(gods). And so our dedication and devotion to the church and state is an ad-diction of the mind,
body, and soul to the artiÞce of evil (Þction). We must be tricked into abandoning Jehovah and Its
Natural Law to worship God in name (noun) only through the vicarious replacement gods of the
temporal realm, which despise the power of the Biblical christ even in their claims to hold that
spiritual power and authority as Its vicars (secular replacements/antichrists).

I here wonder if the reader is brave enough to discover the Truth of these preceding statements, or
will you burn this work because it goes against your be-lief (state of love) for the artiÞcial corp-
orations of church and state and the love of money (mammon)? Can the sincere Truth of Reality
(Jehovah) trump the feigned truth (lies) of Þction?

To be de-voted is to have your vote (will) taken away in lieu of the collective public opinion. We
call this the act of voting for public ofÞcers, while at the same time we are made to believe that
voting is what makes us somehow Naturally free. But voting is not a choice, for there is never a
choice to vote no. A choice between two evils (candidates) is not choice but only causality. The
voting franchise is simply a well-organized lie, granting illusionary powers to those who have had
all their powers taken away through Þctionalization and ad-diction. The expression of a public
vote, of showing up to vote in a legal public persona (property) with permission of the state, is in
actuality the expression of will and consent (via tacit assent) by the man to continue in voluntary
servitude (agency) as a public person, regardless of the outcome of the vote. This Reality is a very
hard pill to swallow, I know. But I never promised the reader a rose garden, now did I?

All living things have been corrupted, and so even beneath every rose lies a dirty little secret:

—=—

UNDER THE ROSE:


“IN SECRET; PRIVATELY; in a manner that forbids disclosure.”




ÑDeÞnition for ÔroseÕ (Webs1828)

—=—

All state secrets are under the rose, which is why you will Þnd the masonic engraving of roses all
throughout government buildings and city halls. It is why we have secretaries of state and defense,
etc., as the keepers of state secrets. A public person is certainly not privy to the private matters of its
principality, and will only know the rose by its appeal, appearance, and fragrance; but never by its
legal character of secrecy (mystery) in artiÞciality.

!312
 —=—

“The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the
transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.”
—Patrick Henry, colonial American revolutionary

—=—

If your head is spinning right about now as you try to Þgure out how this matrix of information
was kept from you all these years, just remember that what you are learning in this work was not
meant for your eyes, but was meant to be kept under the rose; forbidden to be disclosed to the
victims (slaves) of public debtor society. Those who seek and succeed in their quest for power must
keep their secrets, Þrst and foremost of which is to keep the public clueless about the Nature of
privacy.

—=—

“A Spirit that loves wisdom and contemplates the Truth close at hand,
IS FORCED TO DISGUISE IT, TO INDUCE THE MULTITUDE TO
ACCEPT IT… FICTIONS ARE NECESSARY TO THE PEOPLE, and the
Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to
contemplate it in all its brilliance… In fact, what can there be in
common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? THE
TRUTH MUST BE KEPT SECRET, AND THE MASSES NEED A
TEACHING PROPORTIONED TO THEIR IMPERFECT REASON.”
—“Synesius, Bishop of Ptolemais, a great Kabalist, but of doubtful orthodoxy,” excerpted from Albert Pike’s, ‘Morals and Dogma’

—=—

Slaves should never be taught the language that controls them, and secrets exist only by the
secretive, dualistic words that deÞne them. Nature hides nothing that is meant to be seen, for Its
wonder is not bound in any way by the words and designs of men.

Through the expression of the admixed surname, number, and other marks and tokens of legal
identiÞcation, we sign our souls away with each use of a signature. This, as we will discuss later, is
the mark of a beast, as a beast of burden. The beast, as referenced in the Bible, does not describe
some mythological image with red horns and a pitchfork created by commissioned and paid artists
of the priest-class, but is only a reference to a man (any and every man) who has accepted the
surname upon his Þrst name (christian name). Beasts are branded, numbered, and registered by
Caesar (the district).

When we examine more closely the warnings of revelation without the dramatic and artful liberties
of historical and modern evangelical embellishment, idolatry, and false imagery, we can see that the
concept of the beast is each individual man expressing him or herself in and under the law of a false
persona (name, title, and number) of Caesar (a legal district or nation). The beast is he who uses
empty words that lack meaning, substance, or spirit, and who loves to stand in (believe in) the
adversarial, Þctional illusion over Reality, and thus in abandonment of Jehovah and Its Highest
Law.

!313
 —=—

“And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the
name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him
that hath understanding count the number of the beast: FOR IT IS THE
NUMBER OF A MAN; and his number is Six hundred threescore and
six.”
—Revelation 13:17-18, KJB

—=—

Never forget that it is we that voluntarily bear these marks of identiÞcation, the surname, the social
security number, and all other signs and tokens of ad-diction that reveal the signature mark of the
branded beast of one of the ÒunitedÓ nations. But what exactly is the number of a man?

StongÕs Concordance settles the matter in which this last numerical reference is to be considered,
which appears only once in the Bible and yet is the butt of so much controversy and speculators of
its meaning, and wherein it states:

G5516 - Six hundred threescore and six (666).

χξϚ = chi-xi-stigma

1. Six hundred and sixty six, the meaning of which is the basis of much vain
speculation.

ThayerÕs Greek Lexicon - Six hundred and sixty-sixÉ a mystical number the meaning of
which is clear when it is written in Hebrew letters, as ÒNERO CAESARÓÉ

—=—

Of course the Hebrew language is a mathematical one, where letters represent numerical values.
And so it would be broken down as such:

χ = 600


ξ = 60


Ϛ=6

(chi-xi-stigma) - Pronounced - khī ksē stēg-ma

—=—

StrongÕs then deÞnes the word (ßattering title) ÒCaesarÓ as such:

G2541: Kaisar (Caesar)

Καῖσαρ - Kaîsar, kah'-ee-sar; of Latin origin; C¾sar, a title of the Roman emperor:ÑC¾sar.

!314
 Caesar = “severed”

1. The surname of Julius Caesar, which adopted by Octavius Augustus and his
successors afterwards BECAME A TITLE, and was appropriated by the Roman
emperors AS PART OF THEIR TITLE.

—=—

And here is where it all comes together, where all the Þctions and images of the church vanish in
light of the Truth of just what (who) the church and state actually represent.

—=—

“And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from
CAESAR (#G2541) Augustus, that all the world should be TAXED
(#G583).”
—Luke 2:1, KJB

—=—

“And all went to be TAXED (#G583), every one into his own city.”
—Luke 2:3, KJB

—=—

Heading back to StrongÕs Concordance and ThayerÕs Greek Lexicon, we again see the difference
between the Bible (Higher) language and the common, vulgar tongue of the mass of illiterates
speaking dog-Latin. For to be ÒtaxedÓ is not merely the exaction and extortion of money as we
politically consider it. Tax is certainly not just the way it is nor as certain as death (and taxes). Only
public-minded, non compos mentis slaves think in this defeatist way, which is why most common
citizenships pay their taxes. But to be taxed is much, much moreÉ

G583 - “Taxed” - apographō

From ἀ-ό (G575), meaning: from, of, out of, for, off, by, at, in, since, on, etc…
And γράφω (G1125), meaning: write, writing, describe.

1. To write off, COPY (from some pattern)


2. TO ENTER IN A REGISTER OR RECORDS
1. SpeciÞcally, TO ENTER IN PUBLIC RECORDS THE NAMES OF MEN, THEIR
PROPERTY AND INCOME

2. TO ENROLL

Quoting further from ThayerÕs Greek Lexicon:

“apographōÉTo have one’s SELF registered, to enroll one’s SELFÉ those whose
NAMES are inscribed in the heavenly register, Hebrews 12:23 (the reference is to THE
DEAD already received into the heavenly city, THE FIGURE BEING DRAWN FROM
CIVIL COMMUNITIES ON EARTH, WHOSE CITIZENS ARE ENROLLED IN A
REGISTER).Ó

—=—

!315
This is not speaking of dead bodies buried in the ground or hanging out in the ethereal heavens
presented in the false teachings and images of the church. This is speaking of only spiritually dead
(public) men currently living on Earth in the spiritually dead form of a legal Þction as registered
agents and as municipal citizens (municeps) to Caesar (a district), as the general public — the goyim
marked as chattel property.

Citizenship is the registration of men by the surname and other marks of a legally (artfully) as-
signed, Þctional persona. It is the mixing and thus pollution of the inheritable christian Þrst name
with the last (supra/higher) name of the state. It is the separation of the unique and ambiguous Self
from Nature placed into the dualism of a legal entity or so-called “individual” in abstraction of a
whole body politic, e pluribus unum, many voices into one uniÞed cause and one causal id-entity in
support of purely artful pursuits. All hail the district, all nations united as one New Roman empire.

—=—

ÒFurthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we deÞne that it is

ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY FOR SALVATION THAT EVERY HUMAN
CREATURE BE SUBJECT TO THE ROMAN PONTIFF.”
—UNAM SANCTAM, Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302

—=—

Here, as the temporal power of kings (gods) was made subservient to the ecclesiastical power of
the godhead Pope (modern Caesar), a lien (alienation) was created by the church (body of the
secular, vicarial Christ corporation) upon each “human” creature’s soul. The Pope as godhead over
all other gods, quoting this authority by the very Bible that forbids respect of such artiÞcial persons
(body’s corporate) and false gods as that very church. This was again a “genesis” of the legal
personiÞcation of self, the creation story of the separate legal id-entity to be registered under the
church and state. Here we may comprehend that the power of man acting in christ’s teachings was
usurped by the corporate authority of the papal (legal ecclesia) system, where all men of christ are
instead under the corporate god-Head standing vicariously before that of Jehovah. For the Pope, as
stated within this papal bull Unum Sanctum, claims and declares to be the Head of Christ; a temp-
oral middleman and manager between man and Jehovah, like a used car (vessel) salesman who
shall pretend to judge (doom) man temporally and spiritually before and in the “infallible” stead of
God.

—=—

ÒBut I would have you know, that the head of EVERY MAN is Christ;
and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”
Ñ1 Corinthians 11:3, KJB, as referenced in the Catholic Unam Sanctum.


—=—

ÒSome ask, is Jesus a spirit?

Jesus is NOT a spirit! Jesus is a PERSON, A MAN…”
ÑSpeech by Pope Francis, 2015

—=—

!316
 —=—

“For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean PERSON, nor

covetous MAN, WHO IS AN IDOLATER, hath any INHERITANCE in
the kingdom of Christ and of God.”
—Ephesians 5:5, KJB

—=—

To put it simply, the church must respect the artful and Þctional ÒpersonÓ of Jesus the christ in
order to pretend to inhabit and pass on that false crown of persona to each new feeble man acting
in the immortal (corporation sole) ofÞce of vicar of (anti-) GodÕs anointed christ. As the proclaimed
vicar (replacement) of God, as the supposed ceremonially anointed and pre-tended vicar
(replacement) of christÕs person and idolatrous god of all nations, the pope claims to be the
combined head of all heads of all men acting as Òhuman creatures,Ó which are christÕs body (the
church), where the pope is the head of all that body (of all men as one incorporated/artiÞcial
person pretending to be the head of the corporate body of christ). The only way that this feat of
impossibility in Nature can be accomplished is to turn all men in their belief and love (the christ-
heads) of and into artiÞcial persons of a corporation (church/artiÞcial person), re-creating mankind
itself as a single body politic (i.e. as ÒAdamÓ), another word for a corporation (person), with the
pope sitting at the head (as president and ÒshepherdÓ) of that supposedly divine corporation
(artiÞcial person as a body politic). And so we have today the United Nations. In this way, the faith
is turned from a verb of action into an empty name (noun), and the very act of registration to the
strict law of Caesar in every nation (every united district of Caesar) and its sovereign but sub-
servient gods create the contractual faith established long ago with the Þrst tax; the Þrst public
spelling of names.

Christ must be considered by the church not as merely a man, but as the inheritable persona
(status) of that man, not as the only spirit and Word (Law/Son) of God. For only then can each man
acting in the ofÞce (artiÞcial person) of ÒpopeÓ claim to be the newly appointed artiÞcial christ
(Head) of the corporation (church). And so the church claims that it is a sin to worship God except
through it, for the claim to this title of pope is vicariously as the temporal actor (agent) of God, the
false son (antichrist) in a Þsh hat.

But the spirit of christ may only manifest in the actions of men, and potentially so in all men. We
cannot wear the false persona of christ as if it were a law-suit. One simply cannot don a sacred
(cursed) robe and jewelry and thus claim to be dressed in the personiÞcation of christ. No cross can
replace or erase one's lifestyle. One must do as christ did by learning to know what christ knew
and nothing else. But the church must keep us away from this concept of a personal (True Self)
connection to GodÕs Nature through christÕs example, presenting its own false corporate head in
ßattering title as the ÒvisibleÓ head of the church built by masonry, by the hands and designs of
men in the conspiracy of secret society. The Real church is only ever built of men, not by them, and
consists only of those souls who follow in the spirit of christ, not the most recently incorporated
vicarious impersonation and altered doctrine.

—=—

“FOR OTHER FOUNDATION CAN NO MAN LAY than that is laid,

WHICH IS JESUS CHRIST.”
—1 Corinthians 3:11, KJB

—=—

!317
 —=—

“And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man
deceive you. FOR MANY SHALL COME IN MY NAME, SAYING, I AM
CHRIST; AND SHALL DECEIVE MANY.”
—Matthew 24: 4-5, KJB

—=—

“FOR FALSE CHRISTS AND FALSE PROPHETS SHALL RISE, and

shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the
elect.”
—Mark 13:22, KJB

—=—

“In Romans 6:3, Paul states we are "baptised unto death" meaning that
we are not only DEAD TO OUR FORMER WAYS, but they are buried.
TO RETURN TO THEM IS AS UNTHINKABLE FOR A CHRISTIAN as
for one to dig up a dead corpse!”
ÑStrongÕs Concordance deÞnition for G908 - baptism

—=—

“But ye are not in the ßesh, BUT IN THE SPIRIT, if so be that the Spirit
of God dwell IN YOU. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he
is none of his. AND IF CHRIST BE IN YOU, THE BODY IS DEAD
BECAUSE OF SIN; BUT THE SPIRIT IS LIFE because of righteousness.
BUT IF THE SPIRIT OF HIM THAT RAISED UP JESUS FROM THE
DEAD DWELL IN YOU, HE THAT RAISED UP CHRIST FROM THE
DEAD SHALL ALSO QUICKEN YOUR MORTAL BODIES BY HIS
SPIRIT THAT DWELLETH IN YOU.”
ÑRomans 8: 9-11, KJB

—=—

It is quite obviously a self-evident Truth that the corporate Þction ofÞce (person) of ÒpopeÓ as self-
proclaimed vicar of christ dwells internally within no man, for it has no Spirit and no Life, but is
only a ßattering legal (ecclesiastic) title with no self-Existence under God or in scripture. It Exists
nowhere in the Nature of Jehovah, its source being purely of man's design. It is the ultimate false
christ.

!318
 —=—

“Therefore if ANY MAN be in Christ, HE IS A NEW CREATURE: OLD

THINGS ARE PASSED AWAY; behold, all things are become new.”
—2 Corinthians 5:17, KJB

—=—

“FOR THE LAW OF THE SPIRIT OF LIFE IN CHRIST JESUS HATH

MADE ME FREE FROM THE LAW OF SIN AND DEATH.”
—Romans 8:2, KJB

—=—

“For there is ONE God, AND ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND
MEN, THE MAN CHRIST JESUS; IF ANY MAN TEACH OTHERWISE,
AND CONSENT NOT TO WHOLESOME WORDS, EVEN THE
WORDS OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, AND TO THE DOCTRINE
WHICH IS ACCORDING TO GODLINESS; He is proud, knowing
nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof
cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, PERVERSE DISPUTINGS
OF MEN OF CORRUPT MINDS, AND DESTITUTE OF THE TRUTH,
SUPPOSING THAT GAIN IS GODLINESS: FROM SUCH
WITHDRAW THYSELF. But godliness with CONTENTMENT is great
gain. FOR WE BROUGHT NOTHING INTO THIS WORLD, AND IT IS
CERTAIN WE CAN CARRY NOTHING OUT.”
—1 Timothy 6: 3-7, KJB

—=—

It seems that in no way whatsoever does the Bible agree with the Bull of the Catholic Church and
its doctrines. For certainly that corporation (artiÞcial person) teaches a doctrine other than spiritual,
individual, internal Godliness. It insists that the christos Jesus was only a man in Roman history, a
man that may be anthropomorphized and impersonated, though the scriptures in every way defy
this false logic (dialectic). For what is legal, namely title in property, must remain forever in the
artiÞcial legal world for which it is created (birthed), in the realm of false gods. And so this
ÒuniversalÓ church doctrine is made to cause the Son (Law/Word) of God, as the moral story of
Jesus christ, to be in the mind a historically existential and thus completely external concept, a
seminal but inconsequential blip in time. It teaches the anthropomorphized return of Jesus the
christ in the ßesh, as opposed to the scriptural teaching that all man must return to a christ-like
behavior and lifestyle under the Law (Word) of Jehovah. It offers hope where there is none, that
somehow a dead man will return from that physical death, which allows the continuing line of
successors to the ofÞce of pope to remain in the stead of christ until ÒhisÓ never-to-happen worldly
return to reclaim a Catholic throne he never established or condoned in his vow of poverty. And so,
as the pretended, empty, and vicarious christ Þgurehead, the church doctrine teaches that the Spirit
of God exempliÞed by Jesus christ cannot be obtained within any other man unless they join and
register (tax) in tribute their personiÞed legal self to and under the alternative doctrines of that

!319
universal corporate church, meaning that only through the vicar pope can any man apparently and
ceremonially attain a lesser status in the christ-hood. Here again we see the difference between the
verb (action) of christ and the empty name and title of the spiritually dead ofÞce of christ. But these
words (names) of worldly things are completely opposite of scriptural teachings, standing as the
words of madmen and would-be gods, of antichrists; creators and curators of the law of sin in death.

Ultimately, this comes down to yet the same choice between gain and contentment, between usury
and charity, between lust and love, and between the ßesh of mammon and the Spirit of God.
Fiction vs. Reality… to be plugged-in or to remain as the unplugged remnant, this is always the
same underlying question behind all other questions. The church is a peddler of the ßesh, a plucker
and reseller of the forbidden fruit, a justiÞer and thus pretended licenser and false-forgiver of past
and future sins as somehow forgettable ÒhumanÓ events in Þctional history instead of as perm-
anent stains upon the soul, as erasable blips on the Roman calendar to be magically, ceremonially
wiped clean without worry of the True Nature of Jehovah. Like coupons, sins are redeemed like
currency, and we know how much coupon collectors love to hoard and spend their stash. And so
the church personiÞes a reconsideration of the allegorical story and example of Jesus as merely a
ßesh-and-blood man that can be imitated in the similitude (not sameness) of sole corporate ofÞce.
The spirit is drained and turned into an idol, an empty and dead (cruciÞed) image used only to
prop up the latest appointed and falsely anointed Christ-Head of that artiÞcial church. For only in
the True christÕs depiction of death can the false christ assume the name and title thereof. And so in
every way christ is externalized instead of internalized, for without this trickery and imagery of
false idols the church (false christ) would have no followers.

In this way the followers of this false christ Þgurehead (antichrist) remain not cruciÞed in their
personal actions, for the Þgurative meaning of this word crucify from StrongÕs G4717 (stauroō) is to
crucify the ßesh, and to Þguratively extinguish (subdue) passion or selÞshness… In other words,
the followers of the church are the followers of the ßesh, not the Spirit of christ. To become christ-
like we must indeed crucify our Selves from such adversarial entities and lawmakers as the church
and state. Another way of stating this is to nail down or stake down the ßesh and be reborn into a
spiritual way of Life. This simply means that we must become grounded in Nature and Its self-
evident Law. We must follow christ all the way, allowing ourselves to be cruciÞed from such
combinations and cultures, not merely throwing our sins at the statue or name of christ like a dart
at a dartboard. This is not the intended meaning of dying for our sins, that we should pretend our
own sins never happened. No physical death and no nail or thorn need pierce or ÒstigmatizeÓ the
actual body or skin of any man, for this metaphorical death as cruciÞxion is a rebirth back into our
Natural innocence and spiritual Life, just as christ overcame his adversaries and rose in his Spirit
from that spiritual death under Caesars tax and surname and freeing himself from nativity, as our
example to follow. A derivative of Strong's G4716 (stauros), most often mis-transliterated as a literal
Òcross,Ó we Þnd this word stake to be what causes a man to remain in the cities, similar to a legal
estate, acting in the person (status) of that municipal corporation, taxed and burdened by the
obligations of a contractual performance debt to its person (status), and that the word “cross” as
transliterated in the Bible for stauros Þguratively means exposure to spiritual death, another term
for self-denial, as the acceptance of a person-hood in legal id-entity and ßattering title over that of
our True Nature, the True Spirit of one's actual Being. A note is nailed to the cross (public pole/
stake), as a quitclaim of the person, long-called and even today as a public notice in a newspaper. It
is the rendering back to Caesar its persona (mask of property). One Þnally rises from that spiritual
death, born again into the unblemished name of God after that 3-day grace period. Again, one
cannot understand the Þgurative without comprehending the similitude of its literalism.

POSTED - participle passive - Placed; stationed. 1. EXPOSED ON A POST OR BY PUBLIC

NOTICE. 2. Carried to a ledger, as accounts. (Webs1828)

NOTICE - Information; the result of observation, whether by the senses or the mind;
knowledge of the existence of a fact or state of affairs; THE MEANS OF KNOWLEDGE.
Knowledge of facts which would naturally lead an honest and prudent person to make inquiry
constitutes "notice" of everything which such inquiry pursued in good faith would disclose. In

!320
 another sense, "notice" means information, an advice, or written warning, in more or less
formal shape, intended to apprise a person of some proceeding in which his interests are
involved, or informing him OF SOME FACT WHICH IT IS HIS RIGHT TO KNOW AND
THE DUTY OF THE NOTIFYING PARTY TO COMMUNICATE… (Black4) (Black4)

PUBLIC NOTICE - Notice given to the public GENERALLY, or to the ENTIRE community,
or to ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN. (Black4)

—=—

One does not simply defy Caesar while still taxed (registered) under its district authority. One
renders back to Caesar what is the property (status/person) of Caesar, and informs through public
notice all the realm of this rendering and event of civil death, informing and providing evidence by
posting it from the public stauros, or pole (cross). This symbolically represents a public execution of
the strawman, hanging it up or crucifying one's True Self from that Þctional persona, and thus
inequities city
circumcising oneself from that inequitable cityofofcorruption.
corruption.No
Noman
manmay
maybebechrist-like
christ-likewithout
withoutÞrst
Þrst
crucifying (executing) his false persona, no longer carrying the burden of property (status) and its
artful law of persons. Public notice is one of the most ancient and powerful tools, still used by
government agencies, corporations, and citizenships alike, bound today to newspapers that are
loosing circulation and to websites designed for informational purpose.

As an example in the legal realm, I recently received a “warning” ticket (meaning no appearance
necessary and no Þne) from a police ofÞcer for not wearing a seat-belt, ofÞcially styled as a
“citation and notice to appear.Ó The document speciÞcally stated on the back that, ÒTHIS
CITATION IS NOT AN INFORMATION AND WILL NOT BE USED AS AN INFORMATION
WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT.” And so this so-called ticket is assigned no value, and cannot be
used against me as if I were informed of a crime. Remember, the birth certiÞcate is an information,
signed by an “informer.” It is a notice of the birth event of a legal entity, a strawman. And while
this citation will be logged into the police databank and will be cited in the future that I was al-
ready warned, it cannot be used as actual, ofÞcial evidence of an informed warning. In other
words, it is not attached to my person or its record in a way that it can be used as evidence of
crime, unless I am tricked into consenting to allowing that to happen.

And so you might ask, what’s the point? A public notice is an information. And Jesus christ gave
three days after his nailed up public notice (cruciÞxion) to any debt collectors or other villains to
challenge his execution and subsequent quit-claim of legal persona. Now, the author realizes that
this translation is harder to believe than the church propaganda and Hollywood imagery used to
trick and deceive us. But the real question you should be asking is, what is the point of christ being
hung on a post or pike (stauros)? How can that bloody, ritualistic story help me or you? How can I
attain spirituality and eternal Life if my body is hanging dead on a cross? In the end, which trans-
literation is reasonable and actually voluntarily doable by all men? And Þnally, are we to believe
(love) the literal history or learn and emulate the metaphoric meaning of the story? Can we too
abandon Þction, pick up our stake (cross), and follow christ?

Try Þnding the word nail in the Bible. Once again, it is used exclusively as a Þgurative symbol:

—=—

“And now for a little space grace hath been shewed from the LORD our
God, to leave us a remnant to escape, AND TO GIVE US A NAIL IN
HIS HOLY PLACE, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a
little reviving in our bondage.”
—Ezra 9:8, KJB

—=—

!321
 —=—

“And I will fasten him AS A NAIL in a sure place; and he shall be for a
glorious throne to his father's house.”
—Isaiah 22:23, KJB

—=—

“In that day, saith the LORD of hosts, SHALL THE NAIL THAT IS
FASTENED IN THE SURE PLACE BE REMOVED, and be cut down,
and fall; and the BURDEN that was upon it shall be cut off: for the
LORD hath spoken it.”
—Isaiah 22:25, KJB

—=—

“Out of him came forth the corner, out of him the NAIL, out of him the
battle bow, out of him every oppressor together.”
—Zechariah 10:4, KJB

—=—

“And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your
ßesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all
trespasses, HAVING WIPED OUT THE HANDWRITING OF
REQUIREMENTS THAT WAS AGAINST US, WHICH WAS
CONTRARY TO US. And He has taken it out of the way, HAVING
NAILED IT TO THE CROSS.”
—Colossians 2: 13-14, NKJV

—=—

“And they that are Christ's have cruciÞed the ßesh with the affections
and lusts. IF WE LIVE IN THE SPIRIT, LET US ALSO WALK IN THE
SPIRIT. Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another,
envying one another.”
—Galatians 5: 24-26, KJB

—=—

What was nailed to the cross (stauros)? Handwriting; words; a Þctional persona. That which makes
up the false persona. It is the strawman that hangs from the cross, not the man. The ßesh (sinner) is
metaphorically cruciÞed so that man my walk in the spirit of GodÕs Nature, as followers of the Son
(Word/Law).

!322
Now hear this! There is no place in the KJB or earlier Bibles that uses any phrase indicating that
Jesus christ was “nailed to a cross.” The nail is Þgurative. This notion of physically being nailed to
the cross is a purposeful mis-transliteration in other Bibles (false doctrines), designed of course to
mislead and externalize christ from the mind of the individual man, and to worship christÕs death
in stead of his Life. The pope cannot be the replacement of (vicar of) christ unless christ is
portrayed as physically dead. Only the word ÒcrucifyÓ is used, and only in an intentionally
metaphoric fashion to tell a story.

But even these misleading translations let us know that we must follow the story of christ by doing
the same as he, and that we must all metaphorically crucify (nail to a cross) our ßesh (worldly,
sinful wants and desires):

—=—

“Those who belong to Christ Jesus HAVE NAILED THE PASSIONS

AND DESIRES OF THEIR SINFUL NATURE TO HIS CROSS AND
CRUCIFIED THEM THERE.”
—Galatians 5:24, NLT (New Living Translation)

—Compared this to—

“And they that are Christ's HAVE CRUCIFIED THE FLESH with the
affections and lusts.”
—Galatians 5:24, KJB

—=—

See the extreme difference in translation?

Obviously this disease of thought that christ is to be remembered in this demeaning and helpless
pose is not the intention of the True, Spiritual story of the Bible.

Disclaimer: No actual nails were harmed in the making of this misleading re-translationÉ

No rational man would ÒnailÓ himself and die upon a stake or ÒcrossÓ to honor the Life of Jesus
christ and Jehovah, for there is nothing self-evident about this foolish action under GodÕs Law. The
battle is a spiritual one. The New Testament does away with such secularly ritualistic blood
sacriÞce as tribute to the gods. No rational man would suicide himself nor kill (nail) another to a
cross to honor God, nor would he seek out the speciÞc, literal ÒcrossÓ that christ was nailed to in
order to share such a diabolical, literalist fate. That would be a very busy crossÉ And yet, if the
literal translation of scripture is to be always taken, that christ Jesus was indeed physically nailed to
a cross, then according to the rest of such a horriÞcally unspiritual interpretation of scripture all
ÒChristiansÓ should climb aboard that cross to kill themselves and get it over with. If you are going
to be a literalist, donÕt half-ass it, you must go all the way in following Jesus christ!

Does the cross pass the litmus test of Jehovah (Reality)? Is it of GodÕs Creation? Is it Real and of
Nature? No. It doesnÕt grow from the earth, from a tree, or anywhere in Reality. It is a creation of
man, of the Romish church. And for GodÕs sake, itÕs a symbol of the story of a quite horriÞc torture
device that is told to have (metaphorically) killed the Son of God, the Savior! Why would you
possibly wear such a thing around your neck with such vain pride?

!323
In Truth, this is just one of thousands of examples that reminds us that the Word of God (of the
Spirit) is not to be limited or confounded by the words of men (of the ßesh). The words of men are
not to be worshiped or held more authoritative than the Word of God. This is the Law!

—=—

“Reading the morning newspaper is the realist's morning prayer. One

orients one's attitude toward the world either by God or by what the
world is. The former gives as much security as the latter, in that one
knows how one stands.”
—‘Miscellaneous writings of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel,’ translation by Jon Bartley Stewart, Northwestern University Press, 2002, page 247.

—=—

The bottom line is that the idol of christ nailed and hanging dead from the cross and used as the
sick furniture and twisted jewelry of the Catholic (universal) corporate church is a satanic image,
one that is adversarial to True knowledge and Spiritual Life lessons of christ. It leads men not into
the land of the Living, but into the cult (legal culture) of the dead. It leads to a culture based on
false religious doctrine and symbology (simulation), not to a Life Lived based on True spiritual
knowledge. It causes men to remain in surety to their strawmen under the law of the land, that
legal identity and status of which is ultimately the secular property of that same incorporated
church and state.

The common people of the church, as corporate members of that artiÞcial religious family, are
following in the death (person), not the Life (Spirit) of Jesus the christ. The general, mind-
controlled members (believers/lovers) of the church are controlled in their passions and in their
spiritual expression of True Self and thus blinded from the perfect example of christ, which has
been recast into a ÒreligiousÓ id-entity complete with a false and ßattering title, as an incorporated
persona friendly to that which opposes the actual teachings of the scriptural story of christ. In
short, these artfully so-called ÒChristiansÓ acting vainly in the purely ßattering title thereof are
acting in name (noun) only, their verbosity subdued (cruciÞed) and their stake (cross) stuck deeply
in false religion and in the commercial designs of man in mammon. They rely not on themselves
individually but on the church corporation (artiÞcial person) for actions of charity, love, and prayer,
and are taught to believe that giving money to the church is the same as forgiveness for not acting
at all times in charity as One in christ’s True church (People), which is not built by hands but Exists
only in the christ-like Spirit and actions of men. This, to say the least, is not Godliness and certainly
not christ-like behavior, supposing that their own gain and the gains of the church is godliness as
laid down in the Book of Timothy above. In fact, the message of the Bible over and over is to with-
draw one's Self (our True Nature) from such institutions of ßattery and mammon, to pick up our
stake (transliterated as ÒcrossÓ) and follow the path of christ in that perfected example of piety.
Leaving the cities is Þguratively the act of leaving the corporations and jurisdictions of those cities
and authority of their immoral law over persons and other Þctions, including those secularized
churches that kill the Spirit of GodÕs Son (Word/Law). To leave the cities, one must merely leave
the Þctional person (property) bound under those Þctional cities. One must quitclaiming person-
hood and quit operating in surety to a stranger. One must make one's election sure only to Jehovah.

It is important to note that the word “return,” when used incorrectly by translators and followers of
church doctrine, and in other Bibles such as the NLT and NET, is in its origin and intent the word
revelation, which translates to apokalypsis from StrongÕs #G602. This carries not the meaning of a
man returning to this world, but of the disclosure of knowledge of Pure Truth that is Jehovah and
Its Law, as the manifestation or appearance of Òevents by which things or states or persons
hitherto withdrawn from view are made visible to all.Ó In other words, the Word (Law/Son) of
GodÕs Nature and Reality will be revealed so as to overcome the law of men and Þction. Again, this

!324
revelation or return of the Son (Word/Law) of God to all men will be of no use if men do not act
their part as the reborn, revealed to sons of Jehovah. To know the path is not to walk the path, and
so revelation (return of the Word/Law of God) to men is only as good as what men do with that
revelation. And so to be clear, the return of Jesus christ, a name/title that means “Jehovah is
salvation,” is the return of the knowledge of Natural Law to the consciousness of all men. It is our
grand awakening from the strong delusion we are currently in, an unplugging from the big lie of
the legal matrix. But we must choose to follow in revelation. The power of choice always remains
with each of us. We must not be made to believe these most ancient and persistent of lies, that of
the organized religions and their treachery to belittle by personiÞcation this returning knowledge
as the return of a mere anthropomorphized man come to collect souls as in some grand Hollywood
production. The Spirit of Nature’s Law (God’s Word) must be returned to by us all, and this is only
possible by following the path exempliÞed through our own conscious, christ-like actions. Or we
may do as the bloodline of perpetual rulers wish us to continue to do in our ignorance, to either
dismiss utterly or embrace whole-heartedly the mythological return of some supernatural idol of
God that their forefathers created long ago, those keepers of their own secrets and lies under the
rose of utter deception.

It is my hope as author of this exhaustive work that it should be a part of that awakening, of that
revelation (revealing of True knowledge) as it must happen. For many works of many antichrists
abound, leading men to idolatry instead of the self-evident Oneness of GodÕs Nature and Law. In
this way, for many, this work may be considered only as a post-apocalyptic one, for its words are
designed that no man may fall back into this age-old illusion of word magic and religious falsity
once they either escape its illusionary matrix or it collapses on its own artiÞcial foundation built of
no substance. And yet, if your hands and eyes are upon this work, you are or may be merely one of
the remnant watching most others fall back then into some new debtor’s hell of man’s invention,
caught up once again in whatever supposedly Brave New World model and leader rears its ugly
head. Whatever the case, stay aware that the heaviest burden will always be your own Natural
Freedom, and that only you may choose it by resisting all other paths.

To Live in the Spirit… What an interesting word this is! For the word spirit (verb) is again one fairly
absent from any legalese sources. For how does one Þctionalize spirituality? It simply cannot be
done, though the pope does claim somehow a “spiritual jurisdiction” through that corporation. At
best, the law only recognizes spirituality as the opposing force of its own nomenclature, as some-
thing irrelevant and speciÞcally opposed to or even harmful to the legal law, and to the false in-
corporations that claim its legal immunity. After all, the maxim of man’s law states that words are
the spirit of the law. And yet words are always lifeless, soulless, and totally lacking in any spirit of
their own. In fact, in law, the word spiritual is only specially used to describe a certain type of proÞt
and gain in mammon for the priest-class! Hell, even alcohol is a spirit!

But man’s soul… that will always be damned in the legal realm.

SPIRITUAL - Relating to RELIGIOUS or ECCLESIASTICAL PERSONS or AFFAIRS, as

distinguished from "secular" or lay, worldly, or business matters. As to spiritual
"Corporation," "Courts," and "Lords," see those titles. (Black4)

SPIRITUALITIES OF A BISHOP - Those PROFITS which a BISHOP receives IN HIS

ECCLESIASTICAL CHARACTER, as the DUES arising from his ordaining and instituting
PRIESTS, and such like, in contradistinction to those PROFITS which he acquires in his
TEMPORAL CAPACITY as a BARON AND LORD of parliament, and which are termed his
"TEMPORALITIES," consisting of certain LANDS, REVENUES, AND LAY FEES, etc.
(Black4)

SPIRITUALITY OF BENEFICES - In ecclesiastical law. The TITHES of land, etc. (Black4)

SPIRITUOUS LIQUORS - Inßammable liquids produced by distillation, AND FORMING

AN ARTICLE OF COMMERCE… (Black4)

!325
 SPIRITS; SPIRITUOUS - See Coupon; Omissus; Letter. (WCA1889)

SPIRITUAL ADVISER - See Communication, PRIVILEGED, DISTILLERY; EMPTY;

INTOXICATE; LIQUOR. (WCA1889)


SPIRITUALISM - See INFLUENCE. OBTAINING MONEY UPON A REPRESENTATION
that the party obtaining it can cause the spirits of deceased persons to be present in a
material form, is punishable under statutes against false pretenses. See Pretense. While, as an
abstract proposition, spiritualism does not prove insanity, a person may be a MONO-
MANIAC upon that subject as upon ANY OTHER FORM OF RELIGION. (WCA1889)

—=—

So a spirituality (noun) is literally a wage paid to a bishop for his artful performance in a chartered,
corporate character of the secular priest-hood. Surely a man must need to sell his soul to the
established church and its false doctrines to gladly receive such an unspiritual reward in mammon?

To be stated in a way that speaks to the entire purpose of this exhaustive work, to that which is
Truly spiritual (verb) as Being and Living in the Spirit alone, this state of Pure Being is not
recognizable by man’s legal systems of law and thus causes an immunity towards it. For no money
of the state or law of man would ever be involved in True Spiritual matters under God’s Law, and
the man under moral Law must repeal and turn away from such Þctions of the mind. GodÕs Realm
is the anti-place, where no legal jurisdiction lies or exists, including any need for such a nationally
taxed legal tender or other false valuation of that priceless Creation. Just as the man constantly and
consciously acting in Love and Charity is speciÞcally doing so without permission or license from
any man or government, without personiÞcation, and without incorporation of these verbs
(actions) into nouns (persons, places, and things), when man acts in his True spiritual Self he is
untouchable by the legal law of persons (member/citizen-ship), of places (titles of nativity/captivity
and jurisdictions), and of things (money as debt, hereditaments, and properties). In other words,
when one acts only in True and ambiguous Spirit, as that which is not recognizable by the gods of
legal, artiÞcial things, then and only then is one christ-like in oneÕs Pure, unblemished, and un-
marked spiritual Life. This Truth that is the Spirit of christ cannot be passed on within some crown
or corporate veil, and it certainly cannot be anointed upon man with ceremonial oils as with the
false-ofÞce of popes and kings. ItÕs all about the verb, and the verb is the Word, and the Word is
God, and GodÕs Word is the Son, and the Son is the personiÞcation of Jesus christ, whose Word and
path is simply that, “Jehovah is salvation.” This, again, is not religion (noun), it is actual religious
action (verb) in the undertaking of only the moral, spiritual Law and no other, acting always
consciously against that which is evil (artiÞcial). There is no physical church shelter to hide within
or to get on one’s knees to pray forgiveness while consuming GMO bread and corn syrup-based
grape juice for false communion in a public prayer and practice of artful ceremony for false show.
There is only that great Kingdom of Nature and all It may provide unto man’s intention, ability,
and moral action. No lies. No titles. No art. No symbology. No gains or proÞts. No usury. For these
are worldly things done in the artiÞce of evil, creating money like a god by exaction and extortion
of that which is neither due nor reasonable (gain, proÞt, and usury). And of course nothing public
may effect the private man of God, including man’s permissive, secular licenses in legally
organized anarchy to break with that Higher Law. But only the strong man actively applying
revealed knowledge of the Highest Law of Nature will remain Pure of such artiÞces, even as every
attempt will be continuously made to tempt him back into that den of liars and their matrix of
beneÞcial delusion.

—=—

“Then I consulted with myself, and I rebuked the nobles, and the rulers,
and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I set a
great assembly against them… I likewise, and my brethren, and my

!326
 servants, might exact of them money and corn: I pray you, LET US
LEAVE OFF THIS USURY. RESTORE, I pray you, to them, even this
day, THEIR LANDS, their vineyards, their oliveyards, AND THEIR
HOUSES, also the hundredth part of the money, and of the corn, the
wine, and the oil, THAT YE EXACT OF THEM.”
—Nehemiah 5: 7, and 10-11, KJB

—=—

For the public United States citizen-ship, it is actually every “individual” (not divided) person’s
equal positive right in agency to be forcibly exacted (extorted) from in any and every way possible
by the United States and its third party afÞliates (corporations and state governments). Most often
this exaction is in the form of taxation, but can also be paid (in tribute) by time spent in prison,
since money represents time. So let us see what the gods have enforced as our so-called equal rights:

—=—

US Code › Title 42 › Chapter 21 › Subchapter I › § 1981

Statement of Equal Rights:

“ALL PERSONS within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have
the same RIGHT in every State and Territory to… BE SUBJECT TO
LIKE PUNISHMENT, PAINS, PENALTIES, TAXES, LICENSES, AND
EXACTIONS OF EVERY KIND, and to no other.”
—=—

Still think legally created rights bestowed by false gods are a good thing? Still a subject and victim
of your own strong delusion, just as the Bible forewarned you would be? Well, then let’s be perfectly
clear as to just what is a US citizen-ship’s right in all cases to have organized crime forced upon our
persons in exaction (extortion) equally as our “civil right” for use and enjoyment of a federal
persona (status).

Let us take an example. When a police ofÞcer (agent) of the government commits a crime against
your person it is not a crime at all, but rather the fulÞllment of a duty. This, of course, is no defense
on the part of the man fulÞlling that ofÞce of police ofÞcer, but rather a lame excuse. You see, it is
your right as a US public citizenship to be put in pain, punished, and exacted (extorted) from. By
operating a public person of the United States, you are forced to have these equal rights. And so a
police ofÞcer or agent of any other law enforcement agency has the duty to fulÞll your right. You
are, after all, under a contractual relationship that requires such rights. And with any right is
always attached a duty to protect and fulÞll that right. With negative, unalienable rights under
God, no agent of government can touch you in a positive way, for you are not in contract with that
agents principal. In other words, a private man has no legal rights attached to his person, and
therefore has no contractual obligation to accept such positively enforced extortion and other
ÒrightsÓ granted to Þctions. The point here is that all of those precious rights that you continuously
claim from government under its positive declaration and law is what makes you a slave to
govern-ment. For the right is only attached to the person (property), and you may only obtain such
rights by acting in the agency of personhood. And so government has the negative duty only to
those who have reserved all their God-given, Natural rights, which is always the right to be left

!327
alone. This is the difference between a positive duty and a negative duty. For the right does not
exist without the correlative duty to uphold that right in all others equally. So next time you Þnd
yourself cheering for civil or “equal rights,” remember that what you are really cheering for is
voluntary extortion and servitude, because your mind is too weak to follow christ. This Truth will
either offend you unreasonably or it will set you free if you wish it too do so. That’s the power of
choice… Please, don’t shoot the messenger.

To put it simply, extortion is just the price (fee) we pay for use of another’s property (strawman),
which is the sign and token that we have severed our tie to the protective Law of our Natural God
and Creator in the eyes of the legal authorities. We do the same thing when we charge others rent,
exacting more money than what is due for the necessities of Life. We are all agents of this money
matrix in some way or another, living falsely in competition and in hatred of the moral Law. And
that’s exactly what they need to keep the big lie going…

EXACTION - noun - The act of DEMANDING WITH AUTHORITY, and COMPELLING to

pay or yield; AUTHORITATIVE DEMAND; a levying or drawing from BY FORCE; a
DRIVING TO COMPLIANCE; AS THE EXACTION OF TRIBUTE OR OF OBEDIENCE. 1.
EXTORTION; A WRESTING FROM ONE UNJUSTLY; THE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF
ONE'S NECESSITIES, TO COMPEL HIM TO PAY illegal or exorbitant tribute, fees or
rewards. Take away your exactions from my people. Ezekiel 45:9. 2. That which is exacted;
TRIBUTE, FEES, REWARDS OR CONTRIBUTIONS DEMANDED OR LEVIED WITH
SEVERITY OR INJUSTICE. Kings may be enriched by exactions, but their power is
weakened by the consequent disaffection of their subjects. (Webs1828)

EXACT - verb transitive - egzact’. [Latin exigo, exactum. See the Adjective.] 1. TO FORCE OR
COMPEL to pay or yield; to demand or require authoritatively; TO EXTORT BY MEANS
OF AUTHORITY OR WITHOUT PITY OR JUSTICE. It is an offense for an ofÞcer to exact
illegal or unreasonable fees. IT IS CUSTOMARY FOR CONQUERORS TO EXACT
TRIBUTE OR CONTRIBUTIONS FROM CONQUERED COUNTRIES. 2. TO DEMAND
OR RIGHT. Princes exact obedience of their subjects. THE LAWS OF GOD EXACT
OBEDIENCE FROM ALL MEN. 3. To demand OF NECESSITY; to enforce a yielding or
compliance; or TO ENJOIN with pressing urgency. (Webs1828)

RIGHT - noun - 1. CONFORMITY TO THE WILL OF GOD, OR TO HIS LAW, THE

PERFECT STANDARD OF TRUTH AND JUSTICE. In the literal sense, right is a straight
line of conduct, and wrong a crooked one. Right therefore is rectitude or straightness, AND
PERFECT RECTITUDE IS FOUND ONLY IN AN INFINITE BEING AND HIS WILL…
(Webs1828)

RIGHT - noun - …2. CONFORMITY TO HUMAN LAWS, OR TO OTHER HUMAN

STANDARD OF TRUTH (BELIEF/FAITH), PROPRIETY OR JUSTICE. When laws are
deÞnite, right and wrong are easily ascertained and understood. In arts, there are some
principles and rules which determine what is right. In many things indifferent, or left without
positive law, we are to judge what is right by Þtness or PROPRIETY, by custom, civility or
other circumstances. 3. Justice; that which is due or proper; as, TO DO RIGHT TO EVERY
MAN. Long love to her has borne the faithful knight, and well deserv'd had fortune done him
right. 4. Freedom from error; conformity with truth OR fact. Seldom your opinions err, your
eyes are always in the right. 5. Just claim; LEGAL TITLE; ownership; the legal power of
exclusive possession and enjoyment. In hereditary monarchies, A RIGHT TO THE
THRONE VESTS IN THE HEIR ON THE DECEASE OF THE KING. A deed vests the right
of possession in the purchaser of land. RIGHT AND POSSESSION ARE VERY
DIFFERENT THINGS. We often have occasion to demand and sue for rights not in
possession. 6. Just claim by courtesy, customs, or the principles of civility and decorum. Every
man has a right to civil treatment. THE MAGISTRATE HAS A RIGHT TO RESPECT. 7.
JUST CLAIM BY SOVEREIGNTY; PREROGATIVE. GOD, AS THE AUTHOR OF ALL
THINGS, HAS A RIGHT TO GOVERN AND DISPOSE OF THEM AT HIS PLEASURE. 


!328
 8. That which justly belongs to one. Born free, he sought his right. 9. Property; interest. A
SUBJECT IN HIS PRINCE may claim a right. 10. Just claim; immunity; privilege. All men
have a right to the secure enjoyment of life, personal safety, liberty and property. We deem the
right of trial by jury invaluable, particularly in the case of crimes. Rights are NATURAL,
CIVIL, POLITICAL, RELIGIOUS, PERSONAL, AND PUBLIC. 11. AUTHORITY; LEGAL
POWER. WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DISTURB OTHERS IN THE ENJOYMENT OF THEIR
RELIGIOUS OPINIONS. 12. In the United States, A TRACT OF LAND; or a share or
proportion of property, as in a mine or manufactory. (Webs1828)

RECTUS IN CURIA - Right (UNIMPEACHED) in court, or before a court. THE

CONDITION OF A PERSON WHO STANDS BEFORE A COURT WITH NO CHARGE OF
MISCONDUCT PREFERRED AGAINST HIM, OR CLEARED OR PURGED OF A
CHARGE. See under Actus; Amicus; Cursus. (WCA1889)

—=—

So how do we comprehend this notion of the right of commercial freedom, the franchise of public,
national citizenships? We take not that this franchise called as political, commercial “freedom,” the
greatest of open, patriotic lies, is a legal, contractual, revokable right granted to felons by birth (US
citizenships). The strawman may use the right, but it does not own the right. Freedom, as franchise,
simply means not involuntarily enslaved. Thus to stand before the court rectus in curia, where that
legal right of franchise (commercial freedom in the open-air debtor’s prison of the United States
district/seizure/distraint/distress) simply means that the prisoner may be released back into that
hell, that open-air prison, instead of being placed into incarceration or other punishment for bad
behavior. This is referred to above as “un-impeached freedom,” which is the freedom to continue in
voluntary public servitude, commerce, rent, use, taxation, and extortion (exaction) while destitute
of privacy and private land and property holdings. But this purge of “not-guilty” is under no
circumstances to be mistaken for “innocence.” For the person (legal status) being charged and
acquitted is property of the state, which for a man of God is the sin (syn) of transgression against
God’s Law, the calling of another as father. And so, to be cleared of a charge only means that the
right of the person (property) is placed back into the default enfranchisement that is the common
volunteerism (master and servant) of public US citizenship.

Legal freedom is an illusion that is only as convincing as the size of the cage it is granted in. And
America is a very large cage.

To be legally “chargeable,” we must understand that this is a reference to the legal capacity of the
person (legal status), not to the man in surety. The case of Walbridge v. Walbridge, 48 Vt. 63.5 (1874)
expressed that the word chargeable is deÞned Òin its ordinary acceptation as applicable to the im-
position of a duty or burden, signiÞes capable of being charged; SUBJECT, liable, proper to be
charged.” The mere fact that one is chargeable with crime infers that one is under the contract,
control, and subjection of another. Again, this is called freedom (franchise), the status all slaves
were placed into by the 14th amendment when they were “set free” (enfranchised). I suppose birth
is a similar act of the state as that of a slave or prisoner being set free into the open-air prison of
interstate commerce. In other words, black involuntary slaves were made equally “free” as the rest
of the lower-class white and other goyim and volunteer indentured servants and company store
employees within the nation.

Remember, all de facto (illegitimate) militarily enforced governments under the law of nations claim
not merely the empty or despotic authority of tyrants over their proprietary persons in public
citizen-ship, but also that it is their established and ordained right to have god-like authority over
their own legally named re-creations (property), their own Þctionally created persons, places, and
things (proprietary names/nouns). They are like children claiming hold over their own imaginary
tea party, its participants (persons), the Þctional location (place) in which it occurs, and all the
things (instruments) used in that re-created, virtual reality. And when they don’t get their way,
their lawless nature becomes apparent even as their legalistic magic is invoked, having no Father or

!329
Law but their own satanic organized brood. Blood will be spilled if anyone ruins their big
commercial party, for this is the nature of pirates. The appearance and thus force of authority is
strong because the child-like, delusional belief (love) of such Þction over Reality is so strong
amongst the common people. It is part of our culture, our media entertainment, and our public
education.

The law that lays (lies) over what is pretended to exist in the artiÞcial, legal matrix only applies to
artiÞcial, legal things, and only through this belief in their validity by a majority of men may Real
things be effected by that law of artifacts. Legal (positively declared) rights are also merely artifacts
of an un-Real character, having no spiritual (moral) capacity whatsoever, and holding no authority
of self-evidence and no substantive quality of self-Existence. There is nothing to prevent their usage
towards evil intents and purposes except for the strong, self-governed mind of each individual
man himself. Only each private man may defeat the evil designs of other men, for all the artifacts of
men, be they tangible or intangible, require other men to implement their purpose in respect and
thus in agency of evil. A gun that no man consents to Þring under the pretended authority and
order of another man in ßattering title, for instance, is merely a useless machine, a thwarted and
unnecessary artifact collecting dust instead of lives. Words, that’s to say all words, numbers, and
other characters are merely forms and terms of art, standing only as the empty artifacts of the many
dead generations of ill-intended men in some apparent but always empty authoritative, self-
appointed character.

ARTIFACT - noun - ar·ti·fact \ˈär-ti-ˌfakt\ - 1. A: SOMETHING CREATED BY HUMANS

usually for a practical purpose; especially: an object remaining from a particular period
<caves containing prehistoric artifacts>. B: SOMETHING CHARACTERISTIC OF OR
RESULTING FROM A PARTICULAR HUMAN INSTITUTION, period, trend, or
individual <self-consciousness … turns out to be an artifact of our education system — Times
Literary Supplement>. 2: A PRODUCT OF ARTIFICIAL CHARACTER (AS IN A
SCIENTIFIC TEST) due usually to EXTRANEOUS (AS HUMAN) AGENCY. (Merriam-
Webster dictionary online)

ARTIFICE - noun - arátiáÞce \ˈär-tә-fәs\ - 1: Dishonest or insincere behavior or speech THAT

IS MEANT TO DECEIVE SOMEONE. A: Clever or artful skill: ingenuity <BELIEVING
THAT CHARACTERS HAD TO BE CREATED FROM WITHIN RATHER THAN WITH
ARTIFICE — Garson Kanin>. B: An ingenious device or expedient. 2. A: An artful
stratagem: trick. B: FALSE OR INSINCERE BEHAVIOR <social artiÞce>. (Merriam-Webster
dictionary online)

CHARACTER - noun - char·ac·ter \ˈker-ik-tәr, ˈka-rik-\ - The way someone thinks, feels, and
behaves: someone's PERSONALITY. A set of QUALITIES that are SHARED by many
people in a group, country, etc. A set of QUALITIES THAT MAKE A PLACE OR THING
DIFFERENT FROM OTHER PLACES OR THINGS… (Merriam-Webster dictionary online)

—=—

Character is one of the most important words in law, for we and our possessions are treated
according to what character (pretended personality) we pretend and register ourselves to be. The
law only recognizes Þctional characters (actors/persons), not the True Self. Thus Real moral
character is sidestepped in favor of estimated character, or character in valuation of mammon. We
are judged and scored via credit worthiness by who we act as (identity of character), how and where
we act in that character, what we do in or out of character and in public or private, and by when our
actions took place in the legally tracked and legally recorded time domain (per the Roman calendar
of the gods). We are not judged on intention, on why we do anything, for the strict law of the
proprietary character (legal persona) demands that we act without our own intention on behalf of
the principal of that person. Character is also a word of similitude with reputation, and so we are
either judged by our actions as men of God or by the letters (characters) that make up our false
persona. The strawman is merely a Þctional character, one framed in and by man's law. Man (the

!330
actor) is framed and punished for all the crimes of his assigned character (persona). The law of
character is deÞnitively not the law of Nature but stands in the law of persons, places, and things.
Name is the character of person. Jurisdiction is the character of place. Property and possession is the
character of all other things. Whatever internal, moral character we project is purely a side-effect of
the Law we choose to follow. And so we see that all things in artiÞce, including all the artifacts we
or they build, are only ever to be considered as artiÞcial; unnatural. When the art becomes more
believable (beloved) than the Real, when sacrosanctity is applied to Þction, then our foundational
character stems no longer from within but from without. We thus become a piece of art ourselves,
as through learned behavior within our minds without moral blockade over our actions we express
this unnatural way of thinking, tricked as a way of life into ignoring and re-characterizing even our
own perceptions of Reality. Thus Jehovah Itself, as personiÞed and anthropomorphized into so
many images of artifactual religious characters, is lost and replaced by artiÞce and artifacts that
support man's Þctional creations over the Reality of Jehovah. For a ÒChristianÓ is just a character
they play, a mask and pretended status they wear, not a Reality they partake in.

Even Jesus christ is today called as ÒGodÓ and ÒCreatorÓ by millions of misled, make-believe
corporate ÒChristians.Ó The Son (chosen One) was not the Only True God, but was certainly the
way and path (light) to Jehovah. The servant is not the master. Jesus was never said to be the whole
of Jehovah (God) anywhere in the Bible.

—=—

“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee THE ONLY TRUE
GOD, AND Jesus Christ, WHOM THOU HAST SENT.”
—John 17:3, KJB

—=—

“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, THAT GOD
HATH MADE THAT SAME JESUS, whom ye have cruciÞed, both Lord
and Christ.”
—Acts 2:36, KJB

—=—

“One day soon afterward Jesus went up on a mountain to pray, AND HE

PRAYED TO GOD ALL NIGHT.”
—Luke 6:12, KJB

—=—

God made and sent christ as a messenger of God. So how can christ be God (Jehovah)?

Jesus prayed to God, so why have we been taught by the corrupted church to idolize christ as God,
when the scriptures tell us to have no God before the very Nature and substance of Jehovah?

But most importantly, how can you possibly think that the christ will save you if you donÕt save
yourself by following the Word (Son/Law) of Jehovah that christ continually expressed and
exempliÞed as his whole purpose on this Earth?

!331
 —=—

“…But (we) have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not

walking in craftiness, NOR HANDLING THE WORD OF GOD
DECEITFULLY; BUT BY MANIFESTATION OF THE TRUTH
commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god
of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the
light of the glorious gospel of CHRIST, WHO IS THE IMAGE OF GOD,
should shine unto them… For God, who commanded the light to shine
out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the
knowledge of the glory of God IN THE FACE OF Jesus Christ. BUT WE
HAVE THIS TREASURE IN EARTHEN VESSELS, that the excellency of
the power may be of God, and NOT OF US. We are… Always bearing
about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, THAT THE LIFE ALSO
OF JESUS MIGHT BE MADE MANIFEST IN OUR BODY.”
—2 Corinthians 4: 2-4, 6-7, and 10, KJB

—=—

The themes here are that the body is dead without christ, which is the Son, Word, Law of God but
not God. We are only vessels, and can only Þnd the power of God by acting (manifesting) the ÒlifeÓ
of christ, which again is the story of the potentiality of every man following in God's Law (Word).
Christ is not God, but the image of God. This word image is actually transliterated from the word
eikōn from StrongÕs G1504, with the root meaning of StrongÕs G1503 eikō, meaning Òresemblance, to
be like.Ó Eikōn, even through its misleading transliteration as merely the unaccompanied word
image, is deÞned as: Òan image, Þgure, likeness. (A) An image of the things (the heavenly things):
(1) used of the moral likeness OF RENEWED MEN TO GOD, (2) the image of the Son of God,
INTO WHICH TRUE CHRISTIANS ARE TRANSFORMED, is likeness not only to the heavenly
body, but also TO THE MOST HOLY AND BLESSED STATE OF MIND, WHICH CHRIST
POSSESSES. And (B) the image of: (1) one in whom the likeness of any one is seen; (2) applied to
man on account of his power of command; (3) to Christ on account of his divine nature and
absolute moral excellence.Ó

Remember the rule that similitude (likeness) is not sameness. Christ is not God, nor does the Bible
ever claim christ to be God, but rather the example for all men to follow to become christ-like, as
sons of God. 



Finally, we see in this chapter a perfect example of the use of the uncapitalized word ÒgodÓ and the
capitalized word ÒGod.Ó This is not a typo. This capitalization distinguishes between men acting as
gods Òof this worldÓ and the one True God of all Nature and Existence. In both examples though,
the same root word of theos is used, which may be deÞned in various forms, as from Strong's G2316
for theos:

(A) a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities

(B) the Godhead, trinity

(1) God the Father, the Þrst person in the trinity
(2) Christ, the second person of the trinity
(3) Holy Spirit, the third person in the trinity

!332
 (C) spoken of THE ONLY AND TRUE GOD
(1) refers to the things of God
(2) his counsels, interests, things due to him

(D) whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
(1) God's representative or VICEGERENT
(a) of MAGISTRATES AND JUDGES

—=—

The use of the capitonym, the capitalization of the word, causes the word to be speciÞc, whereas the
little “g” makes reference to the legal and ecclesiastical gods, the vicars, etc. The important lesson
here is that every time this word “god” is used, it must be consciously retro-translated back into its
original intent, lest all these different images, likenesses, replacements, and outright false gods be
contemplated to be the same thing in the reader. This trickery is the design of the church and state,
of the translators of the Kings language into the vulgar, common dog-Latin of English.

You see, the problem is that we have been satanically (adversarially) entrained and entertained to
worship the cruciÞxion and death of christ, not the Life-example and message of the substantive
Word (Son/Law). We worship the image of God (christ) as God when we should be attempting in
all of our actions to be of the likeness of christ in order to please God. To please God is a colloquial-
ism that means to be in harmony with all the rest of God’s Creation by following the Natural Law
of God, as personiÞed in the allegoric story of Jesus christ, whose name means ÒJehovah is
salvation.Ó Like a puzzle, these pieces Þt together perfectly and self-evidently, unlike the post-
scriptural doctrines of the church with its many purposeful mistranslations and false mysteries. For
while being systematically and institutionally lead to worship this ever-increasingly violent and
bloody death ritual of the cruciÞxion, even as it is grotesquely portrayed by that completely anti-
christ, Jewish-owned and run Hollywood propaganda machine of entertainments, we are indeed
the ones that have been tricked into crucifying (separating) ourselves from the True Word (Son) and
Realm of GodÕs Nature and Law and remaining entwined in the legal matrix. We are kept from
emulating the entire point of christ’s Life (Spirit) in allegoric story, which was to spread the Word/
Law of Jehovah (e.g., the Natural Law) to all men so that all others could potentially become the
True sons of God. Instead, it is as if the cruciÞx is propped up as a warning sign from the church
and state to deter anyone from acting as christ did or from accessing the True Word of Law (Son) as
the way to spiritual Life. That therefore we should each be punished similarly by corporate ex-
communication or other secular sanction (cruciÞxion/forced separation) dreamed up by that
cursed (sacred) cult of the cross.

The moral of the story is to become christ-like because we cannot ever be God-like, for Jehovah is
not a mere man but all of Existence (verb). We may follow the Law (Word) but never be the Law-
maker (Creator).

And so, under God’s Natural Law, rights are not what we demand from others through some petty
and binding sanctionable contract, but what we observe and protect in and on behalf of all others
unselÞshly and without reward. By ensuring the God-given negative rights of all others, we ensure
that we as well will be treated in the same way, in perfect and unalienable equity under Jehovah.
Once this notion of duty is detached from what is Truly and self-evidently Right (correct) as a
course of one's moral actions under God, the now empty legal (Þctional) positively declared ÒrightÓ
becomes a fallacious noun, a privilege granted legally (forcibly) in name and by title (inequitable
status) only, being proclaimed selÞshly as personal property instead of unselÞshly respected as a
protected, sacred and reciprocal duty towards all men. This Highest Law and Its entailed duty is
thus abandoned in pursuit of the legally possessive ÒrightÓ in exclusive property and use. But of
course, to obtain such a legal right, the Natural rights of others must be ignored and abused, that
Natural duty licensed away into the oblivion of a narcissistic, continually depredating and de-
grading society controlled only by the chaotic evils of the law of men’s imaginations. Rights do not
grow on trees nor may they be tilled from the land or be found anywhere in Nature. They simply

!333
don’t Exist except in man’s imagination. And so it is up to the re-born remnant, the spiritually
driven man to measure all useless concepts (fruit) such as “what is a right” according to the moral
law in True Equitableness, to follow the teachings of and act according to the Son (Word/Law), and
to fall not into temptation by the appearance of such false inequities offered under a devil’s con-
tract by evil men in their organized, criminal governments. For we must remember that the second
we accept such legal, artiÞcial, unnatural rights from men in ßattering title, the maxim of law that
the creator of that right controls its user as its god is comfirmed, and the protection of that right demands
subjection to a system of law that is not of Nature but of man (false gods). In the end, whatever
right we may claim toward all other men must always be negative in its application and
functionality. The negative is an appeal only to the duty of all other men to leave us alone in our
spiritual endeavors and course without trespass or interference, including the commandment to act
repulsively towards all Þctions and legalistic (falsely bestowed) ÒrightsÓ and entitlements, and to
act Purely and with intention to respect only the Highest Law and Its negative duty. The second we
respect any man’s person or title is the second we show respect to the lower, corrupted law of
Þctional persons over our very Source of Life and our True individual Dominion over the Earth
(Creation). Like the single ant in its vast colony, we must be united and strong in our self-evident
cause and effect, but never in words (names and titles) of contraction. As strange as this may sound
to the propagandized goyim of the nations, we must be divided to stand, for to be united under
man's law, words/names, and contract is akin to slavery. The very principle of Natural freedom
requires self-governance under God, not mutual consent to the doctrines of men. For with the law
of men comes the executively enforced sanctions of that law, the punishments for non-obedience,
which do not allow for moral considerations or scriptural interpretations. The two systems, that of
Reality and of Þction, simply cannot be mixed in any Real or Natural way.

CONTRACTION - noun - [Latin] 1. The act of drawing together, or SHRINKING; the act of
SHORTENING, NARROWING or LESSENING extent or dimensions, by causing the
PARTS OF A BODY to approach nearer to each other; the state of being contracted… 2. The
act of shortening, abridging, or REDUCING within a narrower compass by any means. A
poem may be improved by omissions or contractions… 4. A CONTRACT; MARRIAGE
CONTRACT. [Not used.] 5. Abbreviation. (Webs1828)

—=—

We are taught grammatically to think that only words can be abbreviated. That’s because we never
think of our 2nd selves (our false, legal persona) as purely a creation of the sum of words. We must
remember that the strawman is made 100% of words and nothing else. To abbreviate anything is to
take a fraction (that which is already divided) and reduce it to its lowest terms. This is how all
persons are equalized under the law of contract, reduced to a common denomination of goyim
assigned with “equal rights” to be taxed, licensed, punished, put in pain, and of course exacted
(extorted) from in a multitude of devilishly clever legal ways and means. We even pay through
taxation the salaries of the police ofÞcers (agents of the legal matrix in ßattering title), who legally
and without repercussion beat us up in the name of and under the color of man's legally created
law. But this is just one person in false, authoritative title jack-booting another person in a sub-
ordinate status. ItÕs all Þction. And since persons arenÕt alive, persons spill no blood. The state
simply cannot do harm to its own property (person) and a slave (surety) has no “right” to complain
in negative tort that the police should have left them alone, since punishment and pain are the
positively assigned and equal ÒrightsÓ of all public persons in the Þrst place. And no matter how
much we pray (plead) to the gods (administrative judges) of the court, those ofÞcers of the court
will never recognize the unalienable, God-given, negative rights of any man while he is on his
knees appearing in another's person (property) like the weak and ignorant slave that his actions
show him to be. He who begs for the Òpeace and securityÓ of the Þctional state instead of reserving
all rights from it deserves not the unalienable and protective rights of God. One God, one Law.

Notice in the above deÞnitions that the ambiguous religious opinions are off limits, that no right
may be claimed that would disturb the True Religious (Natural Law) practices of other men… that
is, unless they also voluntarily claim to be the proprietary legal Þction (anti-God) persons (as

!334
voluntary slaves) as sureties for property (status) of the legal state. Incorporated religions are in
fact legal, artiÞcial persons, and so are not immune from the legal (anti-God) law of man. Only a
man, as one born both in Nature (from the water) and also reborn under the knowledge of Its Law
alone (in the Spirit), may claim the right to be left alone (to invoke the negative, Highest duty of all
other men). But he has no insurance or securities that this will be so, only his faith in GodÕs Word/
Law, for the devils of manÕs designs are always present and on the prowl by their corrupting
elements. And this is why the ÒreturnÓ or revelation (apocalypse) of GodÕs Son (Law/Word) must
happen internally within all men. Only by the return of and adherence to this spiritual knowledge
of Law (the Son) to each of us can we then together secure the rights of all others, adhering to only
the Highest duty of that Law of Nature so that that no man may suffer or be in want of any
positively declared, unnaturally forced ÒrightÓ that defeats such a sacred state of Being in the
perfection of Pure and Natural Equity. All men are Created and should be treated as equal (and
only as men without ßattering title) and that the wealth of all others must be the Highest goal and
duty of each individual man. True Equality as Natural Equity is the antithesis to artiÞcial status. No
king or pope may survive such an apocalypse of spiritual knowledge, for their very authority is
based in such artiÞcial, legal status. Without respect for the idol that is their crown, their Þctional
titles are destroyed. This is not comparable to or even similar to the modernly organized criminal
societies built upon socialism or other forms of false charity or welfare, or that found in the many
clandestine communism, fascist, or communitarian systems we see today. This is the self-evident,
indisputable Law of Nature (Source) that requires no institutions of men as mind controllers
(govern-ment). It is Life without mammon or its money systems. It is the height of all Natural
Reason and Peace, the Self-control of one's own mind, body, and soul.

—=—

“But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the
time of the end: many shall run to and fro, AND KNOWLEDGE SHALL
BE INCREASED.”
—Daniel 12:4, KJB

—=—

The astute reader may realize that this state of Being in the perfection of GodÕs Law carries the
opposite connotation that we have all been brainwashed in support of what is supposedly ÒourÓ
own nation, that we are somehow paradoxically its masters even as we act in the part of its
tributing servants and subjects. Of course nothing about any nation is Òours,Ó for public persons
(plebes) have no land of our own, standing as we do only in common dwelling. Privacy is dead to
us, and so is the idea of sovereign land. Only Land-Lords have that privilege, those private People
in constituted blood posterity and inheritance. And so we Þnd that, when the Natural Law is up-
held between men, the concept of Òunited we stand, divided we fallÓ can be seen to only beneÞt the
corrupt powers that be. In fact, the power of the several States (People) is the fact that they are
foreign (divided) from the United States and from each other, and that each man within is also a
private (several) landholder, each king and lawmaker of their own castle. Their only key to power
is to cause the common goyim born into the subjection of the nation to be patriotic about their own
captivity, to believe in the lie that being united (wed) to the state as father and (per-) son is a good
thing, and that this bond of servitude under Executive, military rule is what somehow actually
makes men free. This is one of the grandest illusions cast by the church and state, for without such
delusions, men would seek their own course free from state tyranny, and all men would be
sovereign private from all others. I would even go so far as to say, with Bible in concurrence, that it
is the duty of all men of God to deny all others any place of false authority above Nature (God), for
such authority can only be achieved by breaking the Natural Law. In other words, as the Bible
states, we are to call no man as ÒFather.Ó We are to respect no genealogies or ßattering titles. And
the only other way to grab authority is to take it by force. None of these ways are of the scriptural,
moral, Natural Law. In Jehovah, in the Reality of Nature, all men are born kings (born equal). But

!335
this bold spiritual power carries with it the assumption and responsibility of a duty to uphold the
Natural Law, and is not merely an invitation to harm and pollute everything in sight. It does not
spell unbounded dominion, but careful care-taking of the land and Its Creatures, sacriÞcing only in
need, never in want. Thus all men must act their spiritual part under that Highest Law, being
wholly Self-responsible as kings and to treat all others as the same (not in Þctional similitude), for
at the same time we are born with the dominion of kings, we are also all born slaves (born equal)
under God, and are bound only by the Law of our Creator, our unending Mother and Father,
Jehovah. To be all-powerful and voluntarily powerless at the same time is the height of spiritual
consciousness, for this is Self-governance, Self-control of the temptations of the mind.

Let us consider here the predictable nature of the cycles of all legal empires of the past. For in-
stance, what people united “democratically” into a country or nation and what monarchical empire
has ever lasted more than 250 or so years, just long enough to fully develop a system of utter
corruption and protection of it as a way of life? The answer: none! And America is set to fall at any
time, being at the end of its own almost 240 year cycle of power. And today, it is no longer people
uniting in democracy, but nations. A central “Roman” empire is about to emerge as the global
power, a district of districts, a Þctional and ruthless Caesar unlike any before it. We are even mark-
ing the occasion with terms such as New Age and New World Order, as if Roman calendric time itself
is being reset for the coming of this new artiÞcial intelligence god of all other idolatrous gods of all
nations, the surrogate father of all false fathers.

The Scottish historian Alexander Tytler (Lord Woodhouselee) in the early 1800Õs composed the
following theory, a cyclic spiral of empire after empire that folds in upon itself merely because it
forgot its original purpose and state of mind. Corruption seems to be par for the course, as does
both political and moral destruction:

“A DEMOCRACY IS ALWAYS TEMPORARY IN NATURE; it simply cannot exist as a

permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that
voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.

“From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most
beneÞts from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will Þnally collapse
due to loose Þscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

ÒThe average age of the worldÕs greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been
about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the
following sequence:

†
From bondage to spiritual faith;
†
From spiritual faith to great courage;

†
From courage to liberty;
†
From liberty to abundance;
†
From abundance to complacency;
†
From complacency to apathy;

†
From apathy to dependence;

†
From dependence back into bondage.”
†

—=—

!336
Plato said that, ‘dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny
and slavery out of the most extreme liberty.’ We can certainly see these cycles manifested herein. And
so perhaps more than any other reason, this tells us that the foundational Laws of the scripture
cannot ever be put to rest, that victory over programmable “human nature” is never a True concept,
and that we Þght even against our own causality and habitual apathy. We must therefore worship
the Son (Law, Word) of God's Nature at all times, never allowing each other to fall into such
organizations of ignorance.

A list put together by Chuck Baldwin, a Constitutional Party presidential candidate in 2008, seems
to lend credence to this theory and to so many historical notes about the fundamental ßaws of
democracy. Consider now that the following empires all lasted just a bit over 200 years, and that at
the end of this list we will always Þnd the current regime holding empire creeping ever closer to its
own self-destruction and de-throning:

—=—

Assyria (859-612 B.C.): a 247-year reign.

Persia (538-330 B.C.): a 208-year reign.
Greece (331-100 B.C.): a 231-year reign.
The Roman Republic (260-27 B.C.): a 233-year reign.
The Roman Empire (27 B.C.-180 A.D.): a 207-year reign.
The Arab Empire (634-880 A.D.): a 246-year reign.
The Mameluke Empire (1250-1517 A.D.): a 267-year reign.
The Ottoman Empire (1320-1570 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Spain (1500-1750 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Romanov Russia (1682-1916 A.D.): a 234-year reign.
Great Britain (1700-1950 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
The United States (1790-2017 A.D.): 227 years and counting.

—=—

Whether this cycle be necessary, circumstantial, or of outright planned obsolescence by its blood-
line of designers, this will be discussed in Volume II of this work. But perhaps the important lesson
here is that somewhere between the beginnings of spiritual faith and awakening in Jehovah and Its
Highest Law and the bondage of dependence upon false gods of the state, the knowledge of those
who were awake is being subverted from their progeny. In other words, as we are apparently about
to experience in these dark times, the apocalypse and revelation of spiritual knowledge and Truth
that the church and state so fear, such apocalyptic times being in Reality the spiritual, christ-like
awakening of the common people from the secrets kept by those false institutions, seems to be the
glad burden of our time and perhaps our own generation. For we are entering not into a mere
continental empire as those before us, but into an international one, a global matrix of id-entity,
dependence, and legal tyranny; a New World Order as never known in our recorded, cyclical history.

Think it canÕt happen? Better Þnish this work. For the question is not whether this is happening or
not, but whether or not this was how it was planned to happen the whole time, even as the
scriptures exactly forewarn of this “fourth Beast” that will be “diverse from all nations.”

And what about this state of dependence and chain-free bondage, this happy servitude and civil
obedience to mammon? What authority could any government possibly have over any man unless
Þrst that man is tricked into accepting an iniquitous, lower-class status (legal identity) within and
under its authoritative structure and administrative law system of proprietary person-hood? The
predator must trap its prey with its own devices. How can any Þctional government possibly claim
propriety ownership over man's children, land, and home unless Þrst that man is tricked into
acting within a false, subordinate persona that must voluntarily register (deliver/abandon) all his
named property to governmentÕs district in the Þrst place? How can any club have control over its
members without a voluntary contractual obligation requiring subjection to its creators? And how

!337
can those creators (fathers/gods) of that club have authority unless they also class themselves as
the elect, a synonym for the words elite and higher-class, and ensure their bloodline such executive
military power by a rigged, indirect election of president (god) through “Electors” and political
parties (artiÞcial persons/private associations) instead of through a popular vote? A more correct
question would be to ask: how can government claim legitimacy in its self-evidently illegitimate
actions against all men without Þrst proving manÕs foolish consent to its super-natural authority,
causing conÞrmation and consent through the express actions of each man within a formal agency
relationship evidenced by the use of some public persona? For it is only our own voluntary actions,
our want and greed for their patented money and property, that legitimize the crimes against our
True Selves as standing sureties (subordinate puppet-masters) over their registered, proprietary
strawman…

For GodÕs sake folks, going to prison is strictly a voluntary act; a payment in time for crimes
committed against Þctional persons, places, or things! This is the power of be-lief. And where the
person goes, the surety is sure to follow.

Yet another aspect of the dog-Latin induced ignorance of the commonalty of the world is this term
of art right and the arrogance that it induces within unspiritually driven men. We could say that
any manÕs rights are only what his chosen God gives to him, and that no other rights exist. But we
must also remember that no rights Exist in Nature (Reality), and that Jehovah is not the Creator of
rights (concepts), for no rights would be needed if the duty to all men under GodÕs authority of
Natural Law were always respected as Highest. The opposite of wrong, to obtain such a
substantiated and ordained “right” in legal terms of course has the opposite effect of its Natural
intent. In other words, when a right is extended in self-evidence because of a correlating duty, this
is negative law. But when a right is demanded in legal (artiÞcial) form without any correlating
duty, this is a legal right that does not Exist in Nature. It is positively created and enforced. It is
right attained by force, as the right of all the gods, kings, popes, presidents, and other archons of
the Þctional nations of the world. And so what is a positive law right (noun) bestowed politically or
civilly is most often a wrong (verb) presented as a forced contractual obligation (right) in name
only. Such positively proclaimed rights are those that allow wars and murders to be falsely justiÞed
(declared) in the Þctional realm against what is Naturally, self-evidently right and wrong. For while
no man may harm another under that negative, Natural duty, the very purpose of positive law is to
violate every man's right to be left alone.

Exaction (extortion), for instance, is every citizenshipÕs enforceable, positive law ÒrightÓ under Title
42 of US Code, which is to say that all public persons must pay tribute, tax, and fee by force to
government agencies in exchange for such a legal status (person-hood) and the organized criminal
ÒprotectionÓ it affords that false persona. And thus consequentially through that agency relation-
ship, the man standing as its surety must pay that tribute. To contract a right is no different from
contracting any other dis-ease, for to obtain a political, artiÞcial, legal right in anotherÕs persona
one must at the same time give up oneÕs Natural, God-given, unalienable ÒrightsÓ in exchange. In
other words, one must abandon Jehovah (Natural right) to accept satanism (adversarial legal right),
which attach only to Þctional persons, not men. But remember that in Nature these so-called ÒGod-
given rights” are in a negative substance, meaning that one has a right not to be exacted from, and
this right is unalienable for man until he chooses to operate a Þctional persona in commerce under
the gods (idols) of the nations. Once this happens, the negative duty to respect any such negative
right to be left alone and unharmed dies on the legal chopping block. Quite simply, a Þction cannot
be operated under the Natural, negative Law, for a Þction exists only under the devilÕs positively
written contracts and subsequent jurisdictions. Its rights are strictly written as positive law. It has
no negative capacity, only legal (positive) capacity, which means government has no duty to leave
it alone.

A cartoon positively (forcibly) appears in its cartoon world. It has no choice to be or not to be, nor
does it have free will in that artiÞcial place. Without that unnaturally forced appearance, the
cartoon world may have no effect upon the cartoon, for the cartoon does not and cannot exist
without (outside of) that Þctional place (jurisdiction). But we must remember that the actions of

!338
every cartoon are subject to the will of its master (principal), its controller (governor), its creator
(god). Its existence is one of total alienation, just as each public person (legal status) of any nation.
Persons (legal statuses) are only ever a positive creation of law, existing only in the legal jurisdiction
of their creator. Only men, not Þctional persons (citizen-ships), have privy to (private capacity to
hold) the untouchable or unalienable rights of God’s Creation. Man cannot worship two gods,
especially when their artful terms and laws contradict one another. GodÕs Law (Natural Law) is al-
ways a negative duty upon all men to uphold the negative right of all others to be left alone, which
is vulgarly and way too simplistically said to be the law of do no harm. In other words, a negative
right cannot be positively claimed or enforced under man’s law, only the duty that creates the
reciprocal right. Yet under the positive law it is the forced right (legal law) that is invoked to en-
force the duty (contractual obligation), as with extortion, where the duty comes in the form of a bill
or invoice, which enforces the public, positive right to be stolen (exacted) from. This is a reversal of
fortune, an attack on the Natural Order of all Things, and is the great difference between spiritual
(negative/unwritten) Law and contract (positive/written) law. The man of God Lives only by his
duty to love and protect all others in Pure Charity and Piety, while the citizen-ship lives only by the
legal rights prescribed by his master (principal), rights which are violently enforced as a required
duty to contractually fulÞll, no matter how evil they may be. Instead of the duty creating the right,
the right is inseparably fused in contract with the duty. Thus the responsible man of God may
always claim to be free of any ÒlegalÓ crime as his Natural duty is always fulÞlled, for he lives only
by his religiously spiritual, moral Law (God) and no other, while the legal persona must actually
commit ÒlicensedÓ crime to remain in the Ògood standingÓ of a legal status. The man must pay-to-
play the person. This is the law of persons, a feudal tribute to false gods where there is no high
ground to stand upon. Of course, this is because all land is under the virtual, commercial sea.

For the beneÞt of the reader, we must always remember this important difference between negative
and positive rights. We must know right from duty and remember that a right comes before or
without a duty only in the positive law creations of man. Under God, there is only duty, and the
commanded right of all to receive from each others fulÞllment of duty is self-evident. No legal
judge is needed to administer what is the self-Existent Natural Law of God, for there is no artiÞce
there, no opinion needed, but only the Truth (Faith) of self-Evidence. All things in the positive
realm are artiÞcial creations of manÕs law, enforceable only through a devilish contractual relation-
ship of some kind. Positive rights apply only to positive (Þctional) creations (legal names and titles)
just as negative rights apply only to God’s ambiguous (unnamed, unregistered, untaxed) Creation.
For anything to be positive, it must be re-created that way, for all things in Nature are in their
Origin of Source and Design of a Purely negative (i.e., nameless, unblemished) Existence. The
quality of anything positive must be added to that which is of Reality, as the metaphorical form
may only be comprehended by knowing its literal substance. And so we call Natural rights also as
negative rights. That which is positive is never of Source, never of Jehovah. What is positive is
always an addition, an addiction, a creation of man.

And so, the best of all examples of the unnecessary plagiarizing of this negative aspect of the
foundational Law is the constitution of the United States. This compact between several private
Peoples, including the so-called Òbill of rightsÓ (original articles 1-10), is strictly a negative law
statement of negative rights, of what government negatively cannot do as opposed to what it can
positively do by permissive law. The bill of rights protects nothing positive, especially the United
States public citizen-ship not a party to its protections. For it protects only private men, not public
persons (property). These styled “rights” are nothing more or less than an imposed and reinforced
duty upon that federal government to uphold the negative rights of that private People that created
it, as the “founding fathers” and the posterity (bloodline) of those they represented. No public
citizen-ship under the subjection of the United States can also claim to have a negative right against
the United States to be left alone. Property has no rights but what its creator (*through a devil’s
contract) allows it to have in an always false market. So this idea of Natural right recognized
inherently within unnatural persons would in fact be quite an oxymoron. Paradox… For to operate
in a denizened, positive law-created public citizen-ship of the United States is to relinquish all
negative rights in lieu of that positive law. The constitution in its negative law capacity thus
protects only those private men that reserve all rights from it. Public citizen-ships can reserve no

!339
rights, for the source of their rights come from government, not Jehovah. Public persons therefore
have nothing private about them, including any set of rights they may reserve from their master
(principal). These inequities in legal status (persona) are quite the opposite in their under-standing.
In fact, it should be obvious that they are really just the same old difference between the nobility
and the common folk.

Private = negative = UNalienable rights (not for sale, with or without consent, express or implied).
This is a state of Being where all rights are reserved in the individual man of God only, as
immunity from any established positive (public) law, meaning the “right” cannot be forced upon
the man. Thus the right is again a verb, for only man’s own actions under negative duty can
establish his negative right. To reserve the negative is to deny the positive, to deny the devil’s
contracted dis-eases.

But this negative state of Being in privacy is only ever a choice. It must be protected and fought for,
and is the only legitimate Þght possible. When we sign for a right in a false legal persona (positive
name) not our own, then our signature contracts the positive, artiÞcially induced, noun form of the
right.

Public = positive = INalienable (reserved but for sale, thus potentially alienable, meaning for
voluntary sale by consent and contract). This is a state of artiÞce (hu-man being) where all rights are
squashed, as with citizenship, because once sold none are reserved, therefore causing the force of
contract where “rights” can be enforced positively (not by Natural duty but by force under
contractual requirement), like the right to be taxed, licensed, punished, put in pain, and extorted
(exacted) from. These are the rights of United States citizens, to be enjoyed and enforced “equally”
with all other public citizens, commonly known as “equal rights.” Again, only slaves in any form,
including voluntary ones, have “equal rights,” which is not the same concept as being born free of
enslavement. Citizenships (persons) are always born with the state as their master, being
denizened/enfranchised into a “free” public citizen-ship and able to pay tribute to Caesar in what-
ever commercial ad-venture he chooses. But none of these choices lead to Natural Freedom, for all
legal choices employment lead to Rome.

The legal word free, in legal parlance, always means franchise. It can have no other meaning than
this, for nothing created by that system can be free from that system as its Þctional existence is de-
pendent on that make-believe system. Just as those plugged into The Matrix were “free” to operate
as they pleased within that mental cage for the mind, so too is a public citizen-ship allowed under
the legal matrix code of law to trespass upon public lands and places, but never onto the private
estates of the gods of that legal matrix. A rat in a cage also has franchise (freedom) to roam about its
cage by permission of its master. This extremely limited freedom of movement, legally, is again
called franchise, just as the cotton-pickin’ slaves of the Founding Fathers plantations were “free” in
their involuntary servitude to move about the farm but not outside is pretty white picket fences.
Just as the over 3 million prisoners in jails are “free” to move about the yard once a day for an hour
based on their good behavior while in that permitted daily franchise. To be free within borders is
not True freedom, it is a franchise. It is Elysium or it is Hades, depending on your standing and
class status in society. And yet even the elect (elite) may act in their falsiÞed nobility when
operating that ßattering title within their own protected borders and in some international
ambassadorship of sovereign immunity under the law of nations. But seeing through those
mansions and estates we Þnd the horriÞc Truth, that these People have merely moved onto their
own created, private, unhappy slice of hell. Like addicts to any other drug, money and power
drives them in their continuous pursuit of pleasure at a dyer expense to their souls, pretending the
appearance of civilized saints while living the lives of pirating thieves and greed-ridden misers.
One might muse that when the elect die and apparently go to hell, they will not notice the change,
for their Existence on this plane is already so far-removed from God.

This, as strange as it may sound, is to say that to not appear or subsist within that artiÞcial system of
mammon is to legally not exist at all, which is akin to True Natural Freedom as long as the Highest
Law is followed. And so True Freedom is equivalent to having no legal, positive “rights” at all, to

!340
having no name or legal status of any form of false persona, and to being free to sojourn and cross
false legal borders at will and without expectation of any protections, securities, or insurances from
the Þctional state. As seemingly scary as this might sound to such comfortable slaves, this is the
only True Freedom under God, where one's only burden is his absolute duty to God’s Creation,
including to all men without judgement or respect of any person or title. Again, you will notice,
this is the opposite of being “united” in legal standing under a contractual relation-ship in surety
and bondage to a person (legal status) as property of the state, which is also, somehow, called
legally as freedom. Only when privately divided from that equality of lower-class status in
commonality may one call his Self as Truly Free.

But, to be perfectly clear, even this Natural Freedom must be remembered to be, if you will, a sort
of spiritual franchise under GodÕs Law and in GodÕs unending, timeless, priceless Realm of Nature.
With Natural Freedom and Pure Privacy comes the single and beautiful burden of duty to the
Natural Law and Laws of Nature. And no burden could possibly be at the same time more
spiritually heavy and yet so easily and bearably light and simple.

It is correct to say that only voluntary slaves (citizen-ships) vote through an allowed-for agency to
cause their masters (the elect) to be seated in authority over them, for the voting franchise (“free-
dom” to vote) is only part of the volunteerism of subjection to the United States as the master of
persons, under the security and protection of that principality of the gods of any nation. It is a false,
manufactured choice that always ensures that one of the elect will Þll the seats of power. A vote for
any candidate is merely a vote yes to keep the bloodline in power, for both candidates in that sup-
posed choice are always blood-cousins of the same ruling elite families of the posterity referenced
in the preamble to the constitution, without exception.

Bottom line: when a man becomes endowed with legal person-hood (positive, public status) as a
United States citizen-ship he loses his man-hood, for it is covered by a person-hood, and the un-
alienable rights of the man can no longer be recognized in negativity within that positive law juris-
diction of the legal matrix. The projected person of man destroys his spiritual Self-respect.

Acceptance and use (conÞrmation) of citizenship is consent to alienation (positively forced rights),
for the blood (Source of Existence) is seen only as tainted. No blood, no Jehovah (Source). Man is
thus purchased (conquered) by the safety and security so warned against by so many wise men
and by the scriptural teachings of the Bible. For all citizens are hirelings. Prostitutes to those who
constituted their existence.

When it comes to the artiÞcial person (ofÞce) of the pope, as the anti- (in the stead of) ÒChrist,Ó his
corporation soleÕs objective is to judge (doom) us all into his Þctional ÒchurchÓ and city-state
(district), not to save us individually from judgement. His mission is adversarial to that of Jesus
christ (the Word of God), the True revealer of knowledge. The pope is no savior, just a cheap,
artfully anointed simulation of the Real. And a similitude is never sameness in any form or
substance of lawÉ that is, unless we agree, consent, conÞrm, and ratify such a big legal lie as we
do. Love or hate, these are merely different forms of be-lief, and belief grants power.

When we read the papal bull Unum Sanctum, the immortal corporate ofÞce of ÒPopeÓ declares the
Catholic corporation (church) as divine over all of the Creation of Jehovah, setting itself up to be
the controller of all of God’s Created Creatures, which as we will learn refers to us as naturals and
monsters, the mass of illiterate, goyim, public, general, low animals; as unregenerate and
unrepentant sons of Adam (man-kind/hu-man personas), but certainly not as the sons of God. For
no Son of God can by GodÕs Law be also a son of Caesar and its false doctrines of district law.
Fictional persons are not an act or creation of God (Jehovah), but an act of sovereign magistrates
(kings). The gods created Adam, not Jehovah, for Adam is but a nick-name for all of mankind, male
and female. And the third person title of ÒmankindÓ (the entire public mass) is certainly not a
several (private) individual man of (Creation of) God, only an artiÞcial person (body politic) that
includes all men who choose a false persona over their True Selves.

!341
 —=—

“Urged by faith, we are obliged to BELIEVE and to maintain that the

Church is ONE, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her
Þrmly and we confess with simplicity THAT OUTSIDE OF HER
THERE IS NEITHER SALVATION NOR THE REMISSION OF SINS, as
the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: 'One is my dove, my
perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,' and
she represents ONE SOLE MYSTICAL BODY WHOSE HEAD IS
CHRIST AND THE HEAD OF CHRIST IS GOD [1 Cor 11:3]. IN HER
THEN IS ONE LORD, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]…”

“…Therefore, of the one and only Church THERE IS ONE BODY AND
ONE HEAD, not two heads like a monster; that is, CHRIST AND THE
VICAR OF CHRIST, PETER AND THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER, since
the Lord speaking to Peter Himself said: 'Feed my sheep' [Jn 21:17],
meaning, my sheep in general, not these, nor those in particular, whence
we understand that HE ENTRUSTED ALL TO HIM [Peter]…”

“We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in
its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal…
BOTH, THEREFORE, ARE IN THE POWER OF THE CHURCH, that is
to say, the spiritual and the material sword, but the former is to be
administered FOR the Church but the latter BY the Church; the former
in the hands of the priest; THE LATTER BY THE HANDS OF KINGS
and soldiers, BUT AT THE WILL AND SUFFERANCE OF THE PRIEST.

“However, one sword ought to be subordinated to the other AND

TEMPORAL AUTHORITY, SUBJECTED TO SPIRITUAL POWER. For
since the Apostle said: 'THERE IS NO POWER EXCEPT FROM GOD
and the things that are, are ordained of God' [Rom 13:1-2], but they
would not be ordained if one sword were not subordinated to the other
and if the inferior one, as it were, were not led upwards by the other.”

“For, according to the Blessed Dionysius, it is a law of the divinity that

the lowest things reach the highest place BY INTERMEDIARIES. Then,
according to the order of the universe, all things are not led back to
order equally and immediately, but the lowest by the intermediary, and
the inferior by the superior. Hence we must recognize the more clearly
that SPIRITUAL POWER SURPASSES IN DIGNITY AND IN

!342
NOBILITY ANY TEMPORAL POWER WHATEVER, as spiritual things
surpass the temporal…”
—UNAM SANCTUM, Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302

—=—

I wondered at why the Þctional character Dionysius was to be considered as ÒblessedÓ by the pope
and why his doctrinal law was to be placed higher than scripture, considering that StrongÕs
Concordance deÞnes that name as Òdevoted to Bacchus,Ó and that Dionysius was the Greek god of
wine, or fully Òthe god of the grape harvest, winemaking and wine, of ritual madness, fertility, and
of theatre and religious ecstasyÓ in Greek mythology! This sounds to me like an unscriptural excuse
by the pope in his Bull, an evocation of GodÕs power without reference to GodÕs actual Word.

HereÕs what I found:

—=—

Dionysius:

(Devoted to Dionysus, i.e., Bacchus) the Areop'agite (Acts 17:34) an

eminent Athenian, converted to Christianity by the preaching of St. Paul
(A.D. 52) He is said to have been FIRST BISHOP of Athens. The writings
which were once attributed to him ARE NOW CONFESSED TO BE
THE PRODUCTION OF SOME NEO-PLATONISTS OF THE SIXTH
CENTURY.
—Smith’s Bible Dictionary

—=—

To be clear, the Roman Empire and its Church (corporation/artiÞcial person) has declared that the
only way to God is through the Catholic Godhead (antichrist). So the only way to the Source of
Nature is through the artiÞcial person called as pope? This means that the reader must believe in (be
in love with) the pope (as vicar of God and as the now anointed, living christos) and that the elected
ofÞce of Pope is actually God incarnate, a hat that can be passed on to each newly elected man
through all of Romanized history. We must love the corporate ofÞce of Pope as if it were vicariously
and thus actually Òthe intermediaryÓ of God supplanted upon Earth, no matter which man nor
how many good or bad men occupy that elected (by other men) corporate ofÞce.

Anointed with gladness by God as Jesus christ, or appointed in a vote by cardinals as Òpope,Ó
whatÕs the big difference, eh?

We must love evil (artiÞce) to reach good (Jehovah). This is the power of unnatural love (belief),
both in the dark and by the light, and this false love (belief) is the only power of that popish Caesar.
This is completely opposite of scripture, to say the least. It takes away the ability of all other men to
obtain christ-like authority under GodÕs Highest Law, and Þxes all nations of men in legal persona
under the strict law of Rome. 


Jesus (Iēsous) christos (ÒJehovah is salvationÓ) = Son = Word of God = Jehovah.

!343
No man of created ofÞce of man, his state, or his church Þts into this equation, for no man alone or
even all men together can be the Totality of all that is in the Oneness of NatureÕs Existence that is
Jehovah. And yet all men are invited to pick up their stake (or vulgarly, their cross) and become the
Son of God through the following of the Word (Son) as the only Law.

—=—

“For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who
will have ALL MEN to be saved, AND TO COME UNTO THE
KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRUTH. FOR THERE IS ONE GOD, AND
ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN, THE MAN CHRIST
JESUS; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testiÞed in due time.Ó
—1 Timothy 2: 3-6

—=—

“Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there;
BELIEVE IT NOT. FOR THERE SHALL ARISE FALSE CHRISTS, and
false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that,
if it were possible, THEY SHALL DECEIVE THE VERY ELECT.Ó
—Matthew 24: 23-24, KJB

—=—

“That we may be altogether of the same mind and in conformity… if

[the Church] shall have DEFINED anything to be black which to our
eyes appears to be white, we ought in like manner TO PRONOUNCE IT
TO BE BLACK… I will BELIEVE that THE WHITE THAT I SEE IS
BLACK IF THE HIERARCHICAL CHURCH SO DEFINES IT.Ó



ÑIgnatius of Loyola, Þrst Jesuit General of the Jesuit Order

—=—

“The letters inscribed in the pope’s mitre are these: VICARIUS FILII
DEI, which is the Latin for VICAR OF THE SON OF GOD.Ó
ÑExcerpt from ÔOur Sunday Visitor,Õ A Jesuit, Roman Catholic publishing company publication, April 18, 1915

—=—

Remember, the pope claims infallibility! If under that Þsh hat he declares that black is white and
left is right then it must be so. And if he hails evil as good it also must not be disputed by those
who follow that false Christ! And let us also be clear, without surprise, that judges in legal courts
have the same power and respect as the gods of legal things to make such Þctional declarations and
to call them as the legally sanctioned Òtruth.Ó They too hold the authority to label through
adjudication what is black as white, as the maxim of law states; the power of re-creation.

!344
Jesus was not merely a vulgar, historical Þgure that lived and died only to be read about in the
fabled histories of the victors like George Washington to justify a corrupt system he was the
founder of. Christ was neither a Þction nor a non-Þctional character to be debated upon by arrogant
men in the celebrated ignorance of dog-Latin with artiÞcially appointed, syndicalist political
power, or by those commoners without knowledge of their very own spiritual power that christ
exempliÞes (personiÞes). And he was certainly not a Ònatural personÓ of manÕs political (legal)
creation. To put it simply, christ was not a Creator, not a god, but was part of the Creation of God.
For if Jehovah is the timelessness and pricelessness of all things without name and without
beginning or end, then how can christ be a part of the timeline of manÕs history if he is the
personiÞcation of the story of the Word of God? How can the Son (Word/Law) of God be the false
creation of manÕs legal Þction as all ÒpersonsÓ (legal statuses) are? How can the pope claim Jesus as
being a legal ÒpersonÓ under Caesars district when God as the Reality and very Life of Nature
(verb) absolutely and under no circumstances Creates nor respects any artiÞcial thing or Þctional
persona in that Nature (Reality), let alone any such ßattering title attached to Þctional persons such
as the sole corporation of the pope? These temporary names and titles are simply foreign to Jehovah
(the Supreme and Permanent Being of self-evident Existence).

The answer is clear. Man is mortal, but incorporated personhood is (Þctionally) to pretend to be
immortal. If christ can be made only to be respected as the legal name and title of a man who lived
and died in manÕs written, vulgar timeline of history among the common people (goyim), and
speciÞcally as an anointed Þctional persona (creation) in the nativity of manÕs law, then any
ÒqualiÞedÓ man may acquire and claim such an anointment so as to play that part in false persona
as a titled ÒChristÓ character in ofÞce. Thus, that man in the purely ßattering, false title of christ
may thus continuously re-create and re-indoctrinate the Word and Law of God and present more
and more ÒbullÓ in that vicarious ofÞce as the pope or other false gods of the nations. In other
words, while the cycle of men continuously Lives and dies as is the Natural Order, the person
(ßattering title) of man may be passed on forever. Thus these antichrists seek to separate the mortal
man (Creation) from the immortal, Þctional title, turning it into a Þctional, legal, ecclesiastical
consideration only and so that this temporal title (crown) can be passed on through a so-called
Òspiritual jurisdictionÓ and be ceremonially placed upon the next heir-apparent spiritual body
(Living, mortal man). And so the ofÞce of Christ never actually dies. It never experiences a civil
death, yet holds no actual spiritual Life. The history and fabled genealogy of Jesus christ is carried
forth immortally through men who claim to be vicar/replacement of (anti-) christ. This is
descriptive of each doctrine of each denominated, legally accepted and incorporated Òreligion,Ó
none of them having any aspect or design of the intent of GodÕs Word among them.

But all of this pomp and circumstance has nothing to do with the scriptures. For it seems the one
most important aspect of christ was forgotten in all of these false religious indoctri-nations. They
forgot or ignored that the ÒSonÓ is only the Word (personiÞed story of the moral Law) of God. We
are not to worship the man or the person of ÒchristÓ in mere name or title only, we are to worship
the Word (Son) in his actions and emulate them in our own Lives. To respect the personiÞcation of
christ in narrative form (as history) over the True Substance of the unwritten Word and Laws of
Nature delivered through that fabled personiÞcation of Jesus is the ultimate folly and fallacious
misstep of man, and is of course just what the false church teaches. In short, there is and can be no
ÒofÞcialÓ vicar of christ according to the scriptural teachings, for all men are supposed to
vicariously govern themselves through the teachings of the Son (Word) and to defeat such darkness
through Jesus christ (Jehovah is salvation) as the ÒLight of the world.Ó

These worldly principalities as the powers that be may only rule over man as long as the
commonalty, as the multitude of goyim of the nations, can be made to not believe in (hate) their
own individual ability and especially our responsibility to manifest the power of GodÕs Word of
Law by following in christÕs actions (Law) and thus Living in timeless immortality (without name,
birthdate, title, or any secular Þction of church and state). Instead, we Þnd a sickening kind of
comfort and ease in being led by the false, corporately denominated ÒChristianÓ religions of the
secular world, through which all roads lead to Rome. And through this false love the pope and
other vicars can claim us all as victims, as the respecters of time and money in name and ßattery of

!345
 false title, and as worshipers of all the legal and ecclesiastical lies that make up this goliath anti-
christ Þction. More importantly, the common people of the nations are led by the church to believe
that this storied christ in persona will return as a man, as an external God. And so we wait upon a
false timeline of future history for that personiÞcation of such a fabled savior to come, forgetting
the Truth of the Timeless Nature of GodÕs Word (Son/Law). Instead of following the Law (Son), we
wait for the false, idolatrous form of the Law (Son) to somehow return in the ßesh or to steal us
away to some church-art created, external heavenly realm, as if the Word (Law) of God is merely a
mortal man on a Romanist timeline and not the entire Being and Nature of Existence. This is an
absurdly literalist translation; a purposeful deceit by these false gods of the church and state de-
signed to keep themselves in power (as men acting in vicarious Christ-hood) until that supposed
glorious return. In Reality, the churchÕs greatest fear is the return (revelation) of this knowledge of
the internal Law (christ), that it will spell the end of the church, for no table of those money-
changers and false gods would be left unturned by those suddenly under-standing of the True
Faith. The Vatican Bank and its massive tomes and vaults of wealth would be dismantled, that
chamber of mythical secrets and worship of so many graven images revealed in what the church
corporation would claim to be an end-times apocalypse for the corporate church while in Reality the
knowledge revealed apocalyptically would cause the common people to be reborn into what was
before occulted. Only the church and state need be afraid of the apocalypse, for these institutions
fear above all else a Truly scripturally and Lawfully educated, self-governing populace that can
suddenly see through such an ecclesiastically ordained and established facade. Until then, until
that return of conscious awareness of GodÕs Nature and Law, these institutions of authority shall
continue to cause all men to act in sin (syn) instead of following the example of the Son (Law) of
God in absolute personal responsibility. We shall remain dead in spirit, serving only them as our
principal masters.

To the church and state, free and open knowledge (revelation/apocalypse) of GodÕs Law in all men
literally means the destruction of these false gods and their institutions of spiritual death.

APOCALYPTICALLY - adverb - BY REVELATION; in the manner of DISCLOSURE.

(Webs1828)

—=—


Disclosure, to make open what was once closed. To the occultists of GodÕs Word, this is certainly
their own apocalypse, the revealing of their integrate fraud.

Hope, especially perpetual false hope, is the greatest weapon of the ages, used by incorporated evil
men to cause otherwise good men from toppling over their false temples and empires by the power
and authority of christÕs name (anointment) as the Law of God's Nature. In this way, through the
power and control of non-vetted and unrequited false hope, Þction (satan) rules over Reality (God).

—=—

“In every country and in every age, THE PRIEST HAS BEEN HOSTILE
TO LIBERTY. HE IS ALWAYS IN ALLIANCE WITH THE DESPOT,
abetting his abuses IN RETURN FOR PROTECTION TO HIS OWN. IT
IS ERROR ALONE THAT NEEDS THE SUPPORT OF GOVERNMENT.
TRUTH CAN STAND BY ITSELF.”
—Thomas Jefferson, from a letter to Horatio Spofford, 1814

—=—







!346
It should be quite clear here why the Bible exclaims to accept no other doctrines or gods before that
which is the Purest Truth (Faith) and Design of Reality in Nature as “Jehovah.” And it should be
very clear why all religious wars and crimes have nothing to do with the scriptural teachings of
christ in the Bible.

Let us consult the scriptures, comparing the bullish and apparently infallible words of the pope
above with the self-evident Word (Son) of God:

—=—

“My brethren, HAVE NOT THE FAITH OF OUR LORD JESUS

CHRIST, the Lord of glory, WITH RESPECT OF PERSONS.”
—James 2:1, KJB

—=—

“And if ye call on THE FATHER, WHO WITHOUT RESPECT OF

PERSONS JUDGETH ACCORDING TO EVERY MAN'S WORK, pass
the time of your sojourning here in fear…”
—1 Peter 1:17, KJB

—=—

The pope is acting as the artiÞcial persona (corporation sole) of christ, as principal agent of the
Holy See and its Vatican Bank, a ßatteringly titled artiÞcial person operating in the Þctional juris-
diction of that virtual water of international commerce in mammon. And so the church commands
that we must abandon scripture (ancient knowledge), and speciÞcally this most important Law of
Nature in Its warning to all of us to respect no person or title of (artfully created by) man, and that
we should instead absolutely and with pre-destined infallibility respect the Þctional person and
ßattering title of that proclaimed vicar (antichrist) called as the Òpope.Ó To be clear, it is not the man
that is antichrist, but the Þctional title and ofÞce of pope. It is a Þction, and all Þction is anti-God,
anti-Nature, and thus anti-Law (antichrist). We’re not merely hurdling insults and bad nick-names
here, we are speaking the literal Truth that no man is Jehovah or christ, and that Þction is self-
evidently opposed to God and christ. Again, the term (anti-) merely means that which is in place of
(vicarious) or that which is opposed to (satanic). This fact simply cannot be overlooked. It is
foundational, an impenetrable and unalterable pinnacle of the First principles of Nature’s Law,
which alone destroys the Bull spewing from that corporation sole (artiÞcial person) of the ofÞce of
pope. There is simply no verse or reasonable translation in the commanded Þnality of the Biblical
doctrine (Law) that gives any man license to change or alter that doctrine. Quite simply, the self-
Evident, unwritten Word (Law/Son) of God cannot be altered by the petty opinions and written
words of man.

It is important to note that there are literally no men existing in legal history (hint, they are all self-
evidently long dead), but the only Þctional reputations and personas (names/masks) and ßattering
titles invented by the men who tell their stories, from presidents and generals to heroes and
traitors. They are mere Þgures, standing only as forms without substance, abstract phantoms of
what once was. No man can ever be Truly known by his actual recorded history, not even when we
write it about ourselves! Only one’s promoted persona and fabled reputation of either heroic or
dastardly deeds and events, and perhaps some clever quotations or empty ghost-written speeches,
might be actually censored and thus ofÞcially said to be Òhistory.Ó Likewise, the personiÞcation of
the Word of the Law of God as the story (his story) told of Jesus christ in the Bible stands at best as
a history of the character of christ. These modern religions worship only the empty form and image

!347
(history) of christ, an idol form, and often celebrate a dead and bleeding statue viciously nailed
upon a cross, while teaching that the substance of christ can only be found externally within its
own halls and under its own indoctrinated priest-class and “spiritual jurisdiction,” but never
within us internally. But we must always remember that the substance of christ (moral Law) can
only be manifested in each of us individually by our own choice and voluntary actions, and that
using any type of history as proof of anything can only be a legal, artiÞcial excuse before a false
magistrate, as yet another registered event upon man’s own created timeline. Of course, no other
Life on this planet records Its political or family history, for this is useless knowledge of Þction, and
such extended family history is self-evident in the very fact of the ßowing blood and Life-Force of
Self-Existence. Life on Earth, excluding man in his own designs and imaginations, is governed by
the unavoidable Laws of Nature. And so christ’s Existence in Reality can only be Truly manifested
through the christ-like actions of men acting according to God’s Law of Nature, not through some
false doctrine, image, throne, alter, or crown, and certainly not by the self-ßattery of wearing a
“cross” around one's neck. Christ is the epitome of Self-government. Its power is in moral actions,
not in idols and things built by hands.

The fraud perpetrated by this corporate ofÞcer of the municipal corporation (city) of the Vatican is
so patently wrong, so provably fallible, so absolutely and unmistakably not supported by the
scriptures, that his words can only be considered as adversarial (satanic) to the very God he pre-
tends to be vicar of.

And yet if christ was not a man, and only the parabolic story of the Word (Son/Law) of God for all
other men to follow, then the ofÞce of ÒpopeÓ could not have been created. For man to play the part
of God, the essence and purpose of God must be devolved into the form and image of a mere
mortal man (person) in a vulgar, humanistic consideration. Only then might popes, kings and
queens claim to be the legitimate heir of christ’s spiritual-turned-secular/temporal throne in in-
heritable sole incorporation. And as we will see, these false, vicarious christ characters do also
claim the fabled genealogy of another god, of previous men sitting enthroned as the land-lords of
past ages, as anointed lord gods of the nations…

—=—

“Even as I sware unto thee by the LORD (Jehovah) God (Elohiym) of

Israel (name of a nation), saying, Assuredly SOLOMON THY SON
SHALL REIGN AFTER ME, AND HE SHALL SIT UPON MY THRONE
IN MY STEAD; even so will I certainly do this day.”
—1 Kings 1:30, KJB

—=—

But wait just a minute! All the gods of the nations are idols. So we know this to be speaking of a
man pretending to be the god of his own Þction, of a nation (district/danger/distress) stretched
over its territory (land). This is not Jehovah speaking. This was the false god King David, the lord
god and magistrate of a nation, not the God of Nature. This is the declaration of a line of kings
(land lords), the same blood-line evoked in the British Crown coronation and false anointment
ceremony in the public prayer of “may the king live forever…” This is, of course, a reference not to
the man but to the Crown, passed from mortal man to mortal man in that immortal Þction of an in-
heritable corporation sole. May the crown corporation live foreverÉ The speciÞc words of that
coronation ceremony will be examined much closer in Volume 2 of this work. But for our purposes,
we need only know that the passing of the Crown is the passing of the idolatrous symbol and false
authority of the incorporated ofÞce of god-hood, of the false, vicarious ofÞce of antichrist to each
new sole proprietor and Defender.

!348
It is also easily veriÞable in the United States government (district, municipal corporation) that the
ofÞces of President and the congressional Members of the United States are individually sole
corporations that are immortally listed with the term Òalso traded as,Ó where after we Þnd the
trust-name of each newly elected man in persona to which that ofÞce is attached to. This is ac-
cording to Dun and Bradstreet and other keepers of corporate listings and information. The ofÞce
never changes, only the name it is Òalso traded as.Ó In a system built on mammon, everything has a
valuation and is securitized for commerce, even the performance of the Þctional president and
congress. This is nothing new, though it is understandably occulted from the comprehension of the
general public. For the common people must be kept believing that a mere man is their president,
not the false and ßattering legal title of a pretended, inheritable god standing in false, legalistic
immortality. We are not supposed to comprehend that the president is god of this corporation
nation just as the kings of other crown corporations, and rule over all of the commercial citizen-
ships (property) we pretend and are registered under oath to be.

But remember, its all Þction! ItÕs all smoke and mirrors mixed with the magic of the language arts.
And itÕs much worse than mere religion. ItÕs patriotism!

Though GodÕs Word is clear that GodÕs Kingdom is nothing built by the hands of man, the popes
and kings (and queens) of this world are clear that the opposite is also somehow true, as they
desperately attempt to cause the rebuilding of the physical representation of the Biblical third
temple of Ezekiel in Israel in these modern times. The second temple, of course, was built by the
masonic hands of Solomon and his contracted members of the craft, and Þnished of course by slave
labor. All these gods of the kingdoms (nations) of men have one sole purpose, to establish and
ordain a posterity of blood in Order that the temporal kingdom may be passed to the next heir in
perpetuity of ofÞce (Crown), the next idolatrous god to take the throne being the bloodline son
(word) as the recorded genealogical issue (son) of the chartered father.

ÒOne perfect sole…Ó

Note that this word sole is not used here in reference to anything spiritual or to the SOUL of man or
GodÕs Creation, but to what is called a corporation SOLE. As opposed to an aggregate corporation,
which generally consists of a directing board and stockholders (as multiple ÒnaturalÓ persons), a
corporation sole is purely individual, a corporation of one, though nonetheless a corporation and
thus still only an artiÞcial person in purely corporate (Þctional) title. One man, one sole. But the
sole is rubber, and thus repulsive to the energy and harmony of GodÕs Nature. For the corporation
sole never touches GodÕs Creation, its Þctional nature being a positive barrier to its grounding in
the negative Law. It must be forced into a false, legal existence and violently so, as history certainly
reveals.

Oh, how I wish this were just clever rhetoricÉ

Examples of corporations sole include that of the Mormon (LDS) church, whose president is legally
incorporated as a (private) corporation sole in its articles of incorporation entitled "The Corporation
of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,Ó as well as a second corporation
sole entitled ÒThe Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
SaintsÓ for that separate ofÞce. Each new man acting in the ofÞce of president of this artiÞcial
person (legalized religion) is affectionately called as Òthe Prophet,Ó and it would be quite an under-
statement to exclaim that the Mormons have their own doctrines separate from the scriptures.
Again, it is not the man that is a prophet, itÕs the hat worn by the man representing that immortal
corporation that is the prophet. There is nothing of Nature or its God in this corporation (artiÞcial
person) either.

!349
 —=—

“And behold, I AM CALLED MORMON, BEING CALLED AFTER THE

LAND of Mormon, The land in the which Alma did ESTABLISH the
church among this people: Yea, the Þrst church which was established
among them AFTER THEIR TRANSGRESSION.”
—Mormon 1:5, Book of Mormon

—=—

God is called respectfully only as the nameless I AM.

The Book of Mormon is titled after a supposed, but likely Þctional man from a land (city) on which
an incorporate church (body politic) was established, as ÒI AM Mormon.” This is obviously a
doctrine created well after the Bible scriptures (in the early 1800s in fact) and thus, as we are duly
instructed, we are not to respect it or the persons and ßattering titles its corporate ÒreligionÓ
artiÞcially creates, regardless of its claimed history (his story). Not ironically, the so-called author
and prophet of Mormonism, one Mr. Joseph Smith, comes from the same direct bloodline of the
1600s era **Howland family of landholders, which are the direct progenitors of presidents George
Bush, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and even Prime Minister Winston
Churchill. This and other genealogy charts hang proudly in the Mormon Square and genealogy
resource center in Salt Lake City, where Mitt Romney and the Bush family is shown to be the direct
descendent of one Anne Hutchinson (born Anne Marbury), a registered and banished ÒwitchÓ and
Antinomian from Salam, Massachusetts. And these are just the direct lines, not referencing the
close cousin relationships through Roosevelt to all presidents and to the founder of Scientology, L.
Ron Hubbard. And of course, Joseph Smith married his close cousin Emma Hale of the Howland
line. This information on genealogy is of course the backbone of American royalty just as it is in
every other kingdom and nation, and is the key to understanding just who and why each
president, senatorial and house candidates, and court justices are elected (appointed). Its all in the
family…

(**For further family history study, see searchable online genealogy sources: “Howland Family Chart,”
the “Hutchinson Pedigree,” and the “Descendants of Anne Hutchinson” family chart).

The ÒArchbishop of CanterburyÓ is also an ofÞce held by a current living (mortal) man corporately
(artiÞcially) clothed in the corporation sole that is that ßattering title. The ofÞce of Queen and King
of England and of the United Kingdom are also in the form of corporationÕs sole, where the current
monarch carries a different corporate shell wherever she may travel. Elizabeth II currently presents
her Þctional self as the corporation sole entitled ÒHer Majesty the Queen in Right of the United
KingdomÓ in her most general artiÞce (ofÞce), though when she visits for political reasons the
individual states of that kingdom, her entitled corporation sole will change into ÒHer Majesty the
Queen in Right of Canada,Ó ÒHer Majesty the Queen in Right of Australia,Ó and even more speciÞc-
ally or locally as the corporationÕs sole entitled ÒHer Majesty the Queen in Right of QueenslandÓ
and ÒHer Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta,Ó etc. These are merely artiÞcial persons, different
corporations for different districted legal jurisdictions. And we must not forget that these words
used as titles of land masses are not land masses at all, but merely crown corporations (magic
words) and jurisdictions in commerce with no tangible aspect at all. They are nouns/names and
nothing else, built merely of words on paper pretended to be placed over territories (land) outlined
on maps (simulacra) in legally created treaties. They are all Þctions, just as all the cities, counties,
states, and districts of the United States exist only on paper. They must be believed in (loved) to
exist. This is the trap and legal matrix of the big legal lie, the antithesis to GodÕs Creation.

!350
The ÒLord Mayer of LondonÓ is also a corporation sole, as many ofÞces both secular and
ecclesiastical are, including the ÒMinister of the GovernmentÓ of the Republic of Ireland and all
ÒVicars,Ó ÒBishops,Ó and ÒDeansÓ of the church of England. Where allowed by state laws, each
parish priest in the Catholic church is also a separate corporation sole. And off course, the
ÒRegistrar General,Ó as keeper of public records for the ÒtaxedÓ and registered populous, is also in
the form of a corporation sole.

In the end, while never forgetting that a corporation is ever anything but an artiÞcial person and
thus NEVER respected by Jehovah, the corporation sole is designed by man to separate the hold-
ings of the sole Þctional and Þnancial ofÞcer (title) of the corporation from the personal holdings of
the man inhabiting that ofÞce. This is the same as any other corporation, which separates the
corporate holdings from the Ònatural personsÓ that incorporated it into one artiÞcial person
(corporation). The wealth of the crown and of these corporate churches and kingdoms is placed
into the corporation sole and so is under the protection of the secular laws of the ecclesia (false
spiritual jurisdiction), while the title of that ofÞce gives a false, unspiritual immortality to the ofÞce
itself (as a corporation sole), where the possessions of the crown and papal holdings can be passed
in legacy to each new ofÞce holder in legal trust. Thus the ÒPopeÓ as a ßattering title never legally
dies, and so the temporal, vicarious god for which the papal ofÞce claims to be also never legally
dies in its corporate personhood. This is the Real story of the immortality of the gods (vicars) from
the dawn of history. For the man, but not the ofÞce, is a mere mortal. Only Þction can pretend a
man to be immortal through legal title. While the man (ofÞce-holder) may wither away and be
replaced after his death, the ofÞce (legacy) remains in the artful perpetuity of Þction.

But with all of this seeming grandeur and spectacle adorned within ceremonial robes and jeweled
crowns amidst the ridiculous extravagance and expense of ÒsacredÓ (cursed) galas and gluttony (all
of which are forbidden under the New Law of the scriptures, and of course paid for through public
tax, tithing, and other guilt-based exaction methods) we must realize only one ultimately important
notion: God respects no person, which all corporations are, and therefore neither should we. No
exceptions! This is an overwhelmingly important lesson taught in virtually every book of the Bible.
Persons (all corporations and false, national or other pretended id-entities) are always artiÞcial de-
signs when compared to GodÕs Nature. And more importantly, none of them are ever bound by
God's Law. What is unnatural is never that which is of God.

Thus, all of GodÕs Living ecosystem of Creation, including all of Living man, is re-presented into
this Þctional legal realm through dead names and ßattering (artiÞcial) titles, where the substance is
separated from the form and disregarded in consideration of the legal law. The church assigns this
duty in modern times to secular, so-called ÒChristianÓ legal governments (the nations), all of which
are subordinate to the churchÕs false ÒspiritualÓ authority and jurisdiction created by false moral
agents (actors). Again, these are the tenets of law, that the government power and its legal law is
inferior to the spiritual Law, that Law of Nature attributed to God. The only problem is that the
pope claims to be as GodÕs replacement, and so is respected in the stead of and vicariously as the
personiÞcation (actor) of Jehovah (God/Lawmaker). And so all created Þctions and titles of the
pope become the pretended infallible word of that false vicar of God, meaning that the very Source
and Foundation of even the Natural Law is broken. It is instead placed into the hands of chaos, of
men that may pretend to change the very Law of Nature at a whim, impossible as that actually is.
What is black, with the magic words of that replacement (anti-) God, can be turned magically to
white. What is right can be made wrong; the light of reason turned to darkness.

In short, manÕs individual spiritual connection to God and Nature is made subordinate through
this ecclesiastical Þction toward the will of the Heads of the corporations of church and state.

SUBORDINATE - adjective - [Latin sub and ordinatus, from ordo, order.] 1. INFERIOR IN
ORDER, IN NATURE, IN DIGNITY, IN POWER, IMPORTANCE, etc.; as subordinate
ofÞcers. It was subordinate not enslaved, to the understanding. 2. Descending in a regular
series. The SEVERAL kinds and subordinate SPECIES of each, are easily distinguished. -
verb transitive - TO PLACE IN ORDER OR RANK BELOW SOMETHING ELSE; to make or

!351
 consider as of less value or importance; as, to subordinate one creature to another; TO
SUBORDINATE TEMPORAL TO SPIRITUAL THINGS. 1. TO MAKE SUBJECT; as, to
subordinate the passions to reason. (Webs1828)

SUB - A Latin preposition, denoting UNDER or BELOW, used in English as a preÞx, to

express a subordinate DEGREE. Before f and p it is changed into those letters, as in
SUFFER, and SUPPOSE; and before m, into that letter, as in SUMMON. (Webs1828)

ORDINATE - verb transitive - TO APPOINT. [Not used.] - adjective - [Latin ordinatus.]

REGULAR; METHODICAL. An ordinate Þgure is one whose sides and angles are
EQUAL… (Webs1828)

SUMMON - verb transitive - [Latin submoneo; sub and moneo.] 1. To call, cite or notify by
authority TO APPEAR AT A PLACE SPECIFIED, OR TO ATTEND IN PERSON TO SOME
PUBLIC DUTY, or both; as, to summon a jury; to summon witnesses. The parliament is
summoned by the king's writ or letter. Nor trumpets summon him to war. 2. TO GIVE
NOTICE TO A PERSON TO APPEAR IN COURT AND DEFEND. 3. TO CALL OR
COMMAND. Love, duty, safety summon us away. 4. To call up; TO EXCITE INTO ACTION
OR EXERTION; with up. Summon up all your strength or courage. Stiffen the sinews,
summon up the blood. (Webs1828)

—=—

The author wishes to clarify that only demons can be summoned! In ancient Greek mythology, a
daemon was considered as “a divinity or supernatural being of a nature between gods and
humans,” while “Socrates claimed to have lived his life according to the dictates of his daimon,”
deÞned as Òan inner or attendant spirit or inspiring force, an archaic spelling of demon,” and
etymologically from the “mid 16th century: common spelling of demon until the 19th
century.” (Oxford Dictionary)

Do not forget just what the gods are, the acting magistrates of the court we pray (plead) to in legal
persona (daemon). But do not fall prey to the Þctional stories, images, and silly tales or rituals of
the organized church. Do not let the fear of the false corporate church deny you from what is the
True and wonderful fear of God, which as we shall see is actually a good thing. Only the persons of
men can be summoned to court, through which the man (agent) is being voluntarily (via contract)
led in his actions by his consented to demon (false persona). The demon (false persona) is being
pulled towards its master (creator), and the demon is attached in bond and surety to the mind,
body, and soul of the master’s victim when summoned to its court. This word demon is not a
religious word per se, only another reference to what evil actually is, which is all that is artiÞcial, all
that is not of Nature as God’s Creation. When we appear in court, we do so in the proprietary sur-
name of the state while stand-ing in surety for it, as the agent for the principal of the status
(persona/employee) we operate in commercially within the systems of the commercial gods of
mammon. This is no joke!

Ultimately, all courts are the king’s (sovereign’s) court, whether that king be the Pope or a sub-
ordinate monarchy, a dictator, or a bloodline of many People within a body politic (State) we call as
a sovereignty. All these are the gods, and all are kings (sovereigns), meaning they have no law (or
God) above them when acting as a single body corporate. Alone, they have no power. In a group
they act as a single entity, a corporation, an artiÞcial persona, as a Þctional, pluralistic god. And all
men in their surety may be summoned by the governing ordinates of that sovereign entity (state) to
appear before the corporate creator of, and thus in the subjective person of and under some ad-
ministrative magistrate (lesser god) in agency.

Personhood turns the objective liberty of man’s Nature into a distrained subject of the state.

!352
 SUBJECTIVE - adjective - Relating to the subject, AS OPPOSED TO THE OBJECT.
Certainty--is distinguished into objective and subjective; objective, is when the proposition
is certainly TRUE OF ITSELF; and subjective is WHEN WE ARE CERTAIN OF THE TRUTH
OF IT. (Webs1828)

OBJECTIVE - adjective - 1. BELONGING TO THE OBJECT; contained IN the object.

Objective certainty, is when the proposition is certainly true IN ITSELF; and subjective,
when we are CERTAIN OF THE TRUTH OF IT. THE ONE IS IN THINGS, THE OTHER IN
OUR MINDS. 2. In grammar, the objective case is that which follows a transitive verb or a
preposition; that case in which the object of the verb is placed, when produced or affected by
the act expressed by the verb. This case in English answers to the oblique cases of the Latin.
(Webs1828)

—=—

We must always remember that the Reality of anything (as Creation) can be perceptibly altered by a
false truth told about it, and that false truth can even be made into a false god (idol), as the gods of
the nations and of the Crown. A subject (person) is not an object (man). Man’s True Existence needs
no proof, for it is self-evident, and needs no declaration. I am that I am. Only the person of man, that
false persona as the status, reputation, and Þctional character of the man need be proven as a truth.
But the legal persona can only ever be subjective; a Þction of the mind. And the lesson to be learned
is that we objectify that which is subjective, as if the subject is the actual object, and live our lives
accordingly in said subjection. While in persona, we ignore Reality in lieu of its Þctional re-
presentation. We believe in (love) evil even as we live a backwards life in our own, kidnapped,
pirated, and trafÞcked mirror image. We are re-sourced as tools of mammon.

God’s Creation is objective, for Its Truth is in Its actual Essence of Existence. God’s Creation
(Reality) is True in and of Itself, needing no proof thereof in Its state of self-evidence. And so the
mirror image of what is objective is what is legally considered as a creation of and thus subject of
legal laws, which we may call as the artiÞcial reßection or ÒpersonaÓ and name (noun) of the Real
thing. The person (surname) of man is always subjective to another as its principal/master, and
man’s bonded surety in performance debt to it causes himself to also become subject to the law of
persons, for he is no longer considered as an object of God, but only as an agent of some archaic
principality.

—=—

“In the sentence, ‘Truth is lovely,’ which word is the name of something
we cannot see, but can think of? Answer: TRUTH. SINCE THE WORD
NOUN MEANS NAME, what is a noun?”

“Sec. 3. A Noun is THE NAME OF ANYTHING; as Henry, boy, Ohio,

book, TRUTH.”
—Pinneo’s Primary Grammar of the English Language for beginners.

—=—

The Truth is, in other words, either the Reality of anything or the established name (noun) of
anything. One is self-evident Life, one is a Þction never seen yet acknowledged and respected as
legal (Þctional) evidence of artiÞcial life. It is when the name is respected as higher than that which
is self-evident in Nature, such as the name of man’s legal person (status), that hell is manifested.
And if it isn’t obvious to the senses, through language arts we have created hell (false truth) on 

earth and support it with our respect of its names. This understanding is key to waking up from

!353
these Þctional chains of legalistic bond and surety. For hell is full of strawmen, and only we can
cause heaven to manifest in opposition to this debtorÕs hell of word magic and illusion.

A man of God is an object, while his Þctional persona (strawman) is a matter of subject. A verb
(action) is objective to its initiator, while a noun (name) is subjective to its legal creator. The name
(noun) form of the substance of a verb is thus property of the one who registers the name, which is
always government or a legal person (agent) thereof. Therefore the actions of the object must be
under the law of that which subjects him. This is to say that a living man under God (the verbosity
of action that is Life Itself) subordinates his re-presented ÒselfÓ when he takes a state-issued sur-
name attached to his Òchristian nameÓ in supra, by which man becomes only an artiÞcial truth
legally considered in the temporal (legal) realm. That which belongs to the public persona (the legal
name), belongs to the creator of that person, whereas the private manÕs possessions belong to him
and him alone. Thus, a private manÕs Self is objectively and subjectively also his own, while a
manÕs pretended public persona (legal version of self) is property of (in subjection to) the state,
only re-presenting the object that is man as a legal Þction in surety to the subject.

Sovereignty is nothing more than total privacy with power to make or break the law and rule over
others. For that which is private is above (supra to) the public law of persons. A person can only
exist as a Þctional ÒtruthÓ (a conÞrmed legal lie) considered in legal law (its creator) when the man
plays the subject and forgoes his objectivity in lieu of the legal beneÞts he may obtain through the
use of the stateÕs Þctional persona (status, number, name, class, species, and rank) as its subject. The
object that is a man of God disappears behind the subject-matter he pretends to be or legally own;
being the Þctional characterization of a legal (artiÞcial) birth. The actor becomes convinced he is the
part he plays. It becomes his reinvented truth. And the most important law is this: we cannot be
seen or recognized as private men of God when we are participating as actors in public persona.
God cannot protect legal persons, for God respects no artiÞce and especially no person.

Notice the distinction between manÕs Self as an objective or subjective occurrence and Òfact.Ó Our
selÞshness references our seeking to enrich our Self over that of others. But the outward self is
always a persona, a reputation, the ego formed by the id-entity, and a subject of our own imaginary
perceptions of our own Reality and place in GodÕs Nature. Thus when we are tricked into
identifying with that projected self-image as an egotistic projection of legal persona and title, using
that false character (our disconnected second self as a false persona used only for public show)
instead of simply Being part of the humble abundance of GodÕs Creation of Permanent and
Supreme Being and Law, we may then and only then be tricked by the word magic of these false
magistrate gods. For they cause us to personify our actual Self into reimagined, legally existing id-
entities (the living dead). Man may own nothing of GodÕs Creation, for man is not the Creator of it.
Only a legal Þction, a person, may attach and register through magical, legal terms of art, its name
to another Þctional name (noun) and pretend to claim false owner-ship of GodÕs Creation. And so
the strawman is borne by and through our own blindness and perpetrated egotistical attitude and
ignorance of our own True Nature.

—=—

“Wherefore I take you to record this day,


that I am pure from the blood of all men.”
—Acts 20:26, KJB

—=—

In this verse, the word ÒIÓ is translated into english from Strong's G1473 - egō - having the general
meaning of I, me, and my as a primary pronoun of the 1st person. Most importantly though, it
carries the notion of antithesis, which speciÞcally means form without substance. A mirror image,
a simulation, but not the Real deal.

!354
 ANTITHESIS - noun - [Gr. from, to place.] 1. In rhetoric, AN OPPOSITION OF WORDS OR
SENTIMENTS; CONTRAST; as, 'When our vices leave us, we ßatter ourselves we leave
them.' 'THE PRODIGAL ROBS HIS HEIR, THE MISER ROBS HIMSELF.' 'Excess of
ceremony shows want of breeding.' Liberty with laws, and government without oppression.’
2. OPPOSITION OF OPINIONS; controversy. (Webs1828)

ANTITHETICAL - adjective - Pertaining to antithesis, or opposition of words and

sentiments; CONTAINING OR ABOUNDING WITH ANTITHESIS. (Webs1828)

—=—

The English language in its popular, general, and common formation is antithetical to the terms of
art of the legal language and vice versa. It is a language designed to cause illiteracy, not in under-
standing but in antithesis to that language which is spoken and regarded as higher in legal settings.
The word legal is antithetical to God’s Nature and Reality. Everything in legality is a lie, where
nothing is self-evident and the lie is more sacred than the Truth. This is the very deÞnition of
satanism (that which is adversarial to God/Truth). And make no mistake that all of these words
and ßattering titles are man-made. They are property of a legal adversary, formed on the devilÕs
(attorney’s) forked tongue.

Both the prodigal and the miser live in fear of poverty instead of simply Being in the Natural fear of
God, the Þrst spending his forefatherÕs fortunes for fear of the reputation of poverty while the
second remains miserably wealthy, hoarding his prize at the destitution and poverty of all others.
And like all false dialectics (logic systems), neither of these states of false being are of God any
more than the love of money that causes their condition is. Most of us are caught some place
between these two extremes in opposition to the Natural Law and regardless of our estate,
ßattering ourselves that our respect, consent, habits, customs, licenses, and general conformity to
the evils of this legal system of mammon are a good thing.

When we state in public and legal settings that I am “the person of another,” we are taking the role
of a Þctional character in 3rd person and pretending it to be as a replacement (anti-) for our Þrst
person (Real Self), vainly feigning to blame the Þction for whatever is lacking in our own
responsibilities and duties under any moral code. We act not in the verb of actual and spiritual
Being but in the noun (name) of another. The law of the name controls the actions of the man
bound in surety to it. For legal purposes, we not only become the strawman in our false legal
appearance and standing in make-believe, but also allow our own minds and bodies to be over-
come by that demon (false persona) as we stand and act soullessly in the surety of the performance
contract and debt implied by such usage of the person (strawman) of another. We become the
Þction in our minds. We believe the legal matrix is Real. Our ego takes over to justify the false id-
entity that is the commercial legal entity of the state, and our whole personality becomes that of
exactly what our masters wish us to become. Our actions are controlled (governed) like puppets on
strings, acting only commercially as automatons without moral conscious. Like renting a car, we
must follow the terms of use and laws relating to the vessel (person) we rent. No legal law may
attach to any man lest that man allow his christian name to be artiÞcially (as a contracted dis-ease)
attached to some master’s legal surname (last name) and thus fall under the authority of the legal
creator (god) of that person (vessel/status) and its binding law. A man without a person may
receive no governmental beneÞts or positive law consumer protections. And even the legal term
Òillegal alienÓ causes any man to be considered in a Þctional status and be treated according to that
ßattering title, which means that he may in-deed receive legal beneÞts through that status.

Again, public education ensures this general public-mindedness via citizenslavement. We are taught
how to behave publicly, not privately. We are driven like cattle away from scriptural teachings and
steered toward Þction. For we are entrained from birth not to act as ourselves, but as the patented
copy of the self (person) of another; a case of mistaken identity, as one that may Þt in to the social
network of that legal matrix of the public realm and artiÞce of law. We operate only as unnatural

!355
personiÞcations of our True Nature, thus we abandon all ÒNaturalÓ Rights and protections of the
Highest Law.

SELF - É3. Self is SOMETIMES AS A NOUN, noting THE INDIVIDUAL SUBJECT TO HIS
OWN CONTEMPLATION OR ACTION, or noting IDENTITY OF PERSON. Consciousness
makes everyone to be what he calls self. A man's self may be the worst fellow to converse
with in the world. 4. It also signiÞes personal interest, or love of private interest;
SELFISHNESS. The fondness we have for self furnishes another long rank of prejudices.
Self is much used in composition. (Webs1828)

—=—

We are either our own Self (under God) or we are operating in the artiÞcial self (vessel) of another
persona. We either identify as GodÕs Creation or as the creation of false gods. The public school
system ensures the later, and from corporate birth we are trained to err as if we are hu-man and
assume ourselves and others to be the person of another.

MISTAKEN - In the use of this participle, there is a peculiarity which ought to be carefully
noticed. WHEN USED OF PERSONS, it signiÞed TO BE IN AN ERROR, TO BE WRONG;
as, I am mistaken, you are mistaken, he is mistaken. But when used of THINGS, it signiÞed
MISUNDERSTOOD, MISCONCEIVED; as, the sense of the passage is mistaken that is, NOT
RIGHTLY UNDERSTOOD. (Webs1828)

IDENTITY - noun - Sameness, as DISTINGUISHED FROM SIMILITUDE AND

DIVERSITY. We speak of the identity of goods found, the identity OF PERSONS, or OF
PERSONAL IDENTITY. (Webs1828)

—=—

Mis-taken samenessÉ

A person is always and without exception a mis-taken identity, for the person is not the Reality of
each of us as Creations of God in Nature. The person is never the same as its model and vital
statistics. The pope, for instance, as merely a man, legally represents the quite purposefully
mistaken id-entity of God and christ (the Word/Law of God). The verb (God/Word) is personiÞed
(named/noun) into a legal ofÞce (persona in granted ßattering title). However, we individually
take an id-entity (a demonic possession) upon our selves voluntarily without comprehension of the
effect upon our actions thereof. The id-entity we use, which is the property of the United States (or
other governments as corporation nations), can only ever be a mis-taken identity when compared
to the man of God wielding that false ID. The maxim of law, which states that similitude is not
sameness (personhood is not manhood, and public is not private), is cancelled out once man
consents by his use of the identiÞcation of that public persona (admixed surname) assigned to him
by the state as a ÒprotectedÓ (insured) vessel for interstate commercial purposes. Respect of the
person is respect of the state (principal corporation/artiÞcial person). The similitude is considered
artiÞcially as permissible sameness under legal law by the actions of the man playing the part of
the character (Þctional person). The law of persons applies to the man acting as surety in person, as
the agent to the principal of that commercial person. Man is thus bound to the artiÞcially projected
self image, no longer himself but the self of another, virtually plugged in to the legal matrix.

—=—

“The SELF is not something ready-made, but something in continuous

formation THROUGH CHOICE OF ACTION.”
—John Dewey

—=—

!356
 —=—

“An heir is ANOTHER SELF, and a son is PART OF THE FATHER.”

—HACRES EST ALTER IPSE, ET FILIUS EST PARS PATRIS. 3 Coke, 12b. (Black4)

—=—

The self is a funny thing. It is used by impersonation, controlled by the legal marks and status
placed upon it, and then reassigned to each of us as a legal, Þctional persona. The self is what
drives us like a puppet on anotherÕs strings, and so if the self adheres to manÕs law instead of to
God’s in Pure Love and Charity then the id/ego sequence results, as the ego tries to rule over and
justify the false id-entity.

To act in per-son is to act as part of the artiÞcial (legal) father. Thus a US citizenship is only part of
the whole body and operates solely to beneÞt his principal (father). But the lawful heir in blood
consideration is as a separate soul, as oneÕs own Self not acting per the artful son (status) of an-
other. One Lives in public or in private, but never in both at the same time. For that would require
two gods, and this is of course forbidden by the One True God.

Self is also the forth word in the Bible, though you would never know it through modern
translations. The word ʼêth as used in Genesis 1:1 is deÞned in StrongÕs Concordance as ÒNOT
TRANSLATED,Ó but states that it is: Òapparently contracted from H226 (i.e. sign, mark, token) in
the demonstrative sense of ENTITY; properly, SELF (but generally used to point out more
deÞnitely the object of a verb or preposition, even or NAMELY):Ñ[as such UNREPRESENTED
IN ENGLISH].Ó The lexicons also speak of its meaning as Òself, or this SAME, and is used
Òreßectively.Ó Set before other words it signiÞes the sense of Òthe thing itself, the SAME thing, or
this thing.Ó One thing for sure we can say is that this form of communication virtually died with its
Roman speaker, in the sense that its practice is not used today in common dog-Latin language
structure. But fascinatingly this word is used each time in the Old Testament when one character
ÒbegetsÓ another (son or daughter), when Adam ÒknewÓ Eve, where this same wording of #H226
is used when cain was Òmarked,Ó implying these were not new characters but new legalistic or
artiÞcial personality traits (reputation/status) for the original personiÞcation of the parabolic
characterÕs identity, as an alter-ego or inßuenced self (false persona). And indeed we Þnd that each
ÒnameÓ of each new begotten character or generation in the Bible has a speciÞc personality trait as
the meaning of its name, such as the word/name Jesus in Its meaning of ÒJehovah is salvation.Ó
You see, each character is merely a potentiality of each man, of you; the stories of all the paths we
might veer unto as lost sheep, including that of Jesus christÕs. We may emulate Noah (to be at rest)
or one of his three Òsons.Ó We are either Abel (breath) or we are a Cain (to be in possession). This is
the very essence of moral storytelling. And with the story of Cain, we are left with this fascinating
riddle:

—=—

“And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can
BEAR. Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth;
and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in
the earth; and it shall come to pass, THAT EVERY ONE THAT FINDETH
ME SHALL SLAY ME. And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever
slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD
SET A MARK UPON CAIN, lest any Þnding him SHOULD KILL HIM.”
—Genesis 4:13-15, KJB

—=—

!357
How many times a day do we see the likeness of Cain? And what is this mark that prevents us
from destroying what otherwise we might all slay upon our Þnding? We Þnd that the mark or sign
(Strong's H226 - ‘owth), as the scriptural mark of Cain, refers to either (1) a military insignia, (2) a
sign of something past, (3) a sign of something future, a portent, or, (4) A SIGN OF ANYTHING
WHICH CANNOT ITSELF BE SEEN, as “the sign of the Covenant,” of “circumcision,” or of the
“Sabbath,” as “a proof, an argument, or a token.Ó Without conscious awareness of even our own
tainted disposition, we pretend to see in every other legal persona we practice intercourse with the
very mark of Cain spoken of here, the sure (he who is in surety for another) sign of possession. For
we all have taken the legal mark (name/number) and treat each other according to that Þctional
persona (mask/mark), as subjects (slaves) of government and its law. We constantly bind each
other by this unseen mark and sign of citizen-ship (fealty). We even have legal identiÞcations not
our own as tokens of our personÕs proprietary possession. We are not shepherds as Abel, but
purchasers like Cain. We are not as sheep under the Law but as he-goats of the goats.

These types of parables are chock full of meaning and wisdom for he who has eyes to see and ears
to hear. And yet, this author would wage generously that no religion would ever teach the intent
and meaning of this story of Þgurative ÒbrothersÓ (i.e., mirror images, different potentialities and
paths of one man). This is because every corporate priest, minister, and reverend of every single
corporately denominated false “church” out there knows that every man, women, and child sitting
in their pews are appearing there in the guise of a false legal persona. We are worshiping publicly
against scriptural instruction and fulÞlling the devilÕs promise of money collection in mammon, as
a collective of the bearers of the various marks of burdened beasts. Instead, those church-going
persons are instructed to follow not the Law of God by their clergy, but the law of the land (the law
of men in government magistracy). We are taught, in other words, to be judged not by God but by
men pretending godhood. As expected, we Þnd well-laid plans already in place for what have been
dubbed as “Clergy Response Teams” across the United States, pre-selected as an integral part of the
theatre of mind control (govern-ment) and psychiatry of psychological warfare.


—=—

"Pastoral crisis interventionÓ Ñ toward a deÞnition…

Abstract: “The pastoral community represents a large and often untapped

resource in times of crisis. It possesses a unique aggregation of
characteristics that makes it uniquely valuable amidst the turmoil of a
psychological crisis. In critical incidents such as terrorism, mass disasters,
violence, the loss of loved ones, and any events wherein human actions
result in injury, destruction, and/or death, the pastoral community may
possess especially powerful restorative attributes. Unfortunately,
heretofore, there has existed no generally recognized and accepted manner
in which the healing factors inherent in pastoral care have been
functionally integrated with the well-formulated principles of crisis
intervention. THIS PAPER REPRESENTS AN INITIAL EFFORT TO
ELUCIDATE HOW THE PRINCIPLES OF PASTORAL CARE MAY BE
FUNCTIONALLY INTEGRATED WITH THOSE OF CRISIS
INTERVENTION. The amalgam shall heretofore be referred to as
"PASTORAL CRISIS INTERVENTION" and is deÞned herein.”
—Loyola College, Maryland, The Johns Hopkins University, USA - From (PUBMED) aka. The US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health, Int
J Emerg Ment Health. 2000 Spring; 2(2): 69-71.

—=—

!358
 —=—

“Pastoral crisis intervention in response to terrorism.”

Abstract: “Pastoral crisis intervention may be thought of as the

functional integration of crisis intervention and pastoral support. In
effect, the practice of pastoral crisis intervention largely REPRESENTS
THE USE OF FAITH-BASED INTERVENTIONS REFINED AND
AUGMENTED THROUGH THE USE OF AN EMERGENCY MENTAL
HEALTH DELIVERY CONTEXT. The value of pastoral crisis
intervention seems apparent in situations involving death, serious
injury, mass disasters, and cataclysmic events such as war. Nowhere,
however, is pastoral crisis intervention potentially more useful THAN
IN RESPONSE TO REAL OR THREATENED TERRORISM.”
—(PUBMED) aka. ‘The US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health,’ Int J Emerg Ment Health. 2003 Winter; 5(1): 1-2, PMID: 12722484

—=—

Let us be clear that these legalized, state-licensed “clergy” are being spoken of here as exactly what
they are, as agents of government; Þctional, legal creations granted the ßattering title and licensure
under man’s legal (anti-God) law. And as incorporated entities of government, their participation
in these clergy intervention response teams are not a choice, but a requisite to remain in commercial
business. Amazingly, we are being lead as sheep by a multitude of the shepherds of Cain, each
having killed his brother (alter-ego) Abel for possession of his pretended title, emoluments, and
pension in mammon. These peddlers of faith-based hope around the nation will ensure the
continuity of the de facto government that incorporated them into their false, ßattering titles of that
organized, syndicalist priesthood, not God’s Word (Law, Son). For religious action, that is action
based on moral belief, is illegal by man’s law, especially against government and its corporations
and agents.

But let us return to the Genesis of when the gods created such Þctions of menÉ

To put a properly versed translation together, the Þrst verse of ÒGenesisÓ reads as follows: in the
beginning (re’shiyth), the gods/magistrates ('elohiym) created (bara’) the entity (‘eth) the
“heavens” (shamayim) and the entity (‘eth) the “earth” (‘erets).

And so the archons, as the legal gods and feudal landlords, created (named) the same Þctional entity
as “heaven” and the same Þctional entity as ÒEarthÓ in similitude? To put it even more crudely, they
simply drew a map. They symbolized all things Real into a simulation, creating their own legal
representation of the Heavens and the Earth, one that men could rule without those pesky Laws of
Nature. It sounds suspiciously like they (false gods) created the same legal Þction ÒworldÓ we
suffer patiently today, as a jurisdiction, a reßection, a simulation, a virtual reality of the heavens
and the earth as a false legal creation in similitude, but not of course in sameness. But then this is
really all that men pretending to be magisterial gods can create, as recreation in make-believe, for
True Creation is only of Jehovah. And they (plural) created the Þctional Adam (plural) from the
already Existing men inhabiting the already made Timeless and already Living True Creation
(Nature). They stole from God Its mirror image, laying claim to what is form without substance.
Thus the word man in its new use came to magically mean slave. In other words, they formed the
genesis (beginning) of the organized crime that is legal government and false (legalized) religion, as
a married church and state, and made themselves as gods over that Þctional form and its imaginary

!359
jurisdiction. Of course, we cannot forget that God (Jehovah) has no beginning and no end, A Being
(verb) of Timelessness, and so to base the “beginning” of Life’s Existence on the timeline of only
“Earth’s” creation is not in sync with the notion of the verb and conceptuality of the Permanence
without beginning or end of Jehovah. In other words, the conception of man’s limited perspective
and knowledge should never be taken as Truth.

The Universe did not begin with and thus expand outward from Earth’s formation, but must have
Existed long before Earth was eventually formed within that Universe, a process of unimaginable
time and energy that man cannot possibly ever Truly comprehend, let alone in a few abstract verses
of scripture. Nor is he supposed to. For nothing is more frightening than the thought of man
having the power through True knowledge of what is attributed only to God. The earth (world) is
not all things, and so the story of its “creation” as the beginning of time seems a bit disingenuous;
unless we consider that this was the creation of manÕs system of Þction and false law by false
“creators” we called as the gods (plural elohiym, as used in the pre-Bible Genesis mythos of many
tribes and peoples before the Bible). Only man operates his Þctions in the Roman calendar and time
domain, not Jehovah. God has no Timex; no blueprints; and certainly no records utilizing the
vulgar words of men. Yet to compare the entire universe and Living Being of Jehovah to the
integral mechanism of the most painfully created of clockworks might to some be an extra-
ordinarily delicious metaphor.

And what can be said as to the creation of “man and woman” through the creation of “Adam” by
these same gods (plural)? Let us examine this notion of the Adam-man; the hu-man.

—=—

“And God (elohiym - “the gods”) said, Let US make man in OUR image
(H6754) after OUR likeness…”
—Genesis 1:26, KJB

—=—

Here we see a breakdown of the this poetic verse through the concordances and lexicons of the
ancient words as they were intended, which cannot be mistaken as anything of Jehovah (a Pure and
Natural Creation/evolution of Life), only of the artiÞce of men in the ßattering titles of their own
pretended deity:

IN OUR IMAGE - (Strong’s H6754 - tselem - öÆìÆí), from Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon
- (1) A SHADOW, metaphorically used of ANYTHING VAIN. Hence— (2) AN IMAGE,
LIKENESS (so called from its shadowing forth); an image, AN IDOL… (Strong’s Concordance)

IN OUR IMAGE - (Strong’s: Outline of usage in Bible) - IMAGE: of TUMOURS, mice,

HEATHEN GODS; image, likeness (of resemblance); mere, EMPTY, image, semblance
(Þguratively). (Strong’s Concordance)

TUMOR - noun - [Latin from tumeo, to swell.] In surgery, a swelling; a morbid enlargement of
any part of the body; a word of very comprehensive signiÞcationÉ 1. AFFECTED POMP;
BOMBAST IN LANGUAGE; SWELLING WORD OR EXPRESSIONS; FALSE
MAGNIFICENCE OR SUBLIMITY. [Little used.] (Webs1828)

GOD - (Strong’s H430 - ‘ELOHIYM - àÁìÉäÄéí) - StrongÕs deÞnition: el-o-heem'; plural of H433
(‘elowahh - a deity or the Deity: God, god.); GODS in the ordinary sense; but speciÞcally
used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; OCCASIONALLY
APPLIED BY WAY OF DEFERENCE TO MAGISTRATES; and sometimes as a superlative:
—angels, exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), (very) great, judges, mighty. (Strong’s
Concordance)

!360
 MAN - (Strong’s H120 - ‘adam - àÈãÈí) - from Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon - (1) “The
Arabs distinguish two races of men, one red, ruddy, which we call white, the other black…
BUT BOTH THESE RACES ARE SPRUNG FROM ADAM… often used to denote MAN
(AS) THE HUMAN RACE. Sometimes put as a genitive after adjectives, AS “THE NEEDY OF
MEN,” i.e. needy men… and especially used: (a) FOR OTHER MEN, THE REST OF
MANKIND, AS OPPOSED TO THOSE IN QUESTION… IN ISRAEL AND IN OTHER
MEN… and (b) OF COMMON MEN, AS OPPOSED TO THOSE OF BETTER
CONDITION… Opposed to vireo (MORE NOBLE)… and (c) USED OF SLAVES… and (d)
OF SOLDIERS… (2) a man, vir… “a man (i.e. one empathetically, WORTHY OF THE
NAME). I have found one of a thousand, but a woman in all their number I have not
found.” (3) Any one… with a NEGATIVE particle, NO ONE… (Strong’s Concordance)

AFTER OUR LIKENESS - (Strong’s H1823 - dĕmuwth - ãÌÀîåÌú) - Outline of Bible usage -
likeness (19x), SIMILITUDE (2x), like (2x), manner (1x), fashion (1x). StrongÕs deÞnition -
likeness, similitude, in the likeness of, like as, and resemblance; concretely, model, shape;
adverbially, like:—fashion, like (-ness, as), manner, similitude. Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee
Lexicon: (1) similitude, likeness, image… “let us MAKE man… according to OUR image;”
compare “HE BEGAT a son according to HIS likeness, after HIS image;” “images of oxen,”
cast, molten oxen; “what image will ye compare to him?” (2) model, pattern. (3)
APPEARANCE, “those four had one appearance.” Followed by a genitive, the appearance of
any thing, that is, AN APPEARANCE RESEMBLING SOMETHING, when any thing seen in
a dream or vision is described as not clearly seen; “and in the midst of it was the appearance of
four living creatures,” i.e. a certain appearance like for living creatures; “the appearance of a
throne…” (Strong’s Concordance)

—=—

Let us (the gods) remake man’s persona after our image (similitude, but not sameness, as idols,
shadows of themselves). Let us create the person-hood so as to call man as slave by his appearance
and proprietary ÒlegalÓ name. Let us create the anti-Jehovah; the legal Þction.

Tumors…

—=—

“I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came
to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not
actually mammals. EVERY MAMMAL ON THIS PLANET
INSTINCTIVELY DEVELOPS A NATURAL EQUILIBRIUM WITH
THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT, BUT YOU HUMANS DO
NOT. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every
natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to
spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that
follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A VIRUS. HUMAN
BEINGS ARE A DISEASE, A CANCER OF THIS PLANET. You're a
plague and we (the agents of technology) are the cure.”
—Quote from character ‘Agent Smith’ from the movie, ‘The Matrix’ (author’s addition)

—=—

!361
When man is said to be remade “into our image,” into the image (persona) of the legal gods, man
became less than man, re-birthed into this age-old matrix of legal Þction without responsibility and
in complete dependence upon his legal gods. He became hu-man. In a system of legal law built
solely upon a foundation in the Þction of mammon and the accumulation of wealth in perpetual
competition, we Þnd that the above statement by the manifestation of the AI is not at all untrue. A
person, as a legal status, is very much like a tumor of man. And this mentality, this spiritual death,
is certainly a dis-ease spread like a virus of the mind, body, and soul. It causes man to destroy his
environment in an unending effort to grow a Þctional economy that, without such meaningless
growth, is considered a failure.

But how much growth can an environment or body take before it begins killing its host? The tumor
knows no bounds because the tumor is not in harmony with the needs of the body it is attached to
and invading. It is a cell mass out of place from its origin of Existence, and is thus unnaturally
programmed with the sole purpose of unchecked, unbalanced, totally vain growth. In other words,
its very Existence is in vain. It is an idol, a simulated copy with no purpose in Nature and thus no
awareness of its own destructive Nature. It ignored its inherent Law, the Law of its own Nature. It
is programmed (educated) and stimulated (entertained) to grow inharmoniously, and so it does
without even a conscious awareness of itself or its effects. But that which is without uniÞed
purpose in Nature quickly becomes that without respect of Nature, and thus can only really be
classiÞed as a biological weapon. This is the simulated form without substance that man has be-
come, a human copy of his True intent and reason for Existence. For his purpose in the artful
persona (property) of CaesarÕs district is only to serve the gods of industry, of banking, of real
estate, and of corporate infrastructure. His purpose is to separate himself completely from his
Source with designs and tools built with his own hands, just as his legal and ecclesiastical gods of
mammon have instructed. And so the hu-man race, as agentic participants in this race to a Þnish
line that can only be located in the worst kind of hell on Earth, one founded upon unlimited yet
fruitless progress of empire without goal or purpose, can only Truly be said to be the cancerous
fulÞllment of our genesis story, our legal re-creation.

This is the creation story nobody seems to want to hear. The gods forbid it, for those with ears to
hear and eyes to see would need to become responsible and make some very difÞcult choicesÉ

We must be aware that Adam and the allegorical story told of ÒhimÓ is the general word for man-
kind, not merely an individual or single man, and is more akin to Òhu-manÓ or all of humanity in
meaning. But man-kind is not any single man any more than a ÒpeopleÓ are, but more of a word
like cattle or herd. Only by legal (artiÞcial) means, namely subjection and enslavement, may a
plural be reduced to a singular body. To identify with the herd (adam) and its humanistic mentality
is the same as identifying as a public personhood. Adam is thus representative of spiritual death, of
they that have fallen from grace. To be begotten (legally birthed) by the legal, ecclesiastical gods is
to be made in vain, to be conquered by the false law of the gods (creators/begetters) of Adam
(man-kind but not man). While man can be said to only possess the qualities of a mammal, a hu-
man is considered only as an animal. That is, unless the artful term of ÒmanÓ is predeÞned as slave
or subject. This distinction has legal precedent and is known as the Òman or other animalÓ (MOOA)
laws, which will be covered shortly.

The word adam is a plural and carries the meaning of the entire multitude of man in a legal capacity
(surname/registration), which is to say the form of man without the individual substance. But this
word kind is not only a noun, but also an action (verb). To be kinded is to be birthed artiÞcially into a
new state of existence, not of Nature but in similitude to what is of Nature (God). To be of a kind is
to be categorized and catalogued into that which is not a singularity, but to be made part of a
group, a species, and thus a class structure. It is to be conquered/purchased and possessedÉ

KINDED - adjective - Begotten. (Webs1828)

BEGOT, BEGOTTEN - participle passive - Of GET. Procreated; GENERATED. (Webs1828)

!362
 GET - verb transitive preterit tense - Got. [gat, obsolete] - participle passive - Got, gotten. 1. TO
PROCURE; TO OBTAIN; TO GAIN POSSESSION OF, BY ALMOST ANY MEANS. We get
favor by kindness; we get wealth by industry and economy; we get land by purchase; we get
praise by good conduct; and we get blame by doing injustice. The merchant should get a proÞt
on his goods; the laborer should get a due reward for his labor; most men get what they can
for their goods or for their services. Get differs from acquire, as IT DOES NOT ALWAYS
EXPRESS PERMANENCE OF POSSESSION, which is the appropriate sense of acquire. We
get a book or a loaf of bread by borrowing, we do not acquire it; but we get or acquire an
estate. 2. To have. Thou hast got the face of a man. This is a most common, but gross abuse of
this word. We constantly hear it said, I have got no corn, I have got no money, she has got a fair
complexion, when the person means only, I have no corn, I have no money, she has a fair
complexion. 3. To beget; to procreate; to generate. 4. To learn; as, to get a lesson. 5. TO
PREVAIL ON; TO INDUCE; TO PERSUADE. Though the king could not get him to engage
in a life of business. [This is not elegant.] 6. To procure to be… To sell; to dispose of; as, to get
off goods… To get out, to draw forth; as, to get out a secret. To draw out; to disengage. To get
the day, TO WIN; TO CONQUER; TO GAIN THE VICTORY. To get together, to collect; to
amass. TO GET OVER, TO SURMOUNT; to conquer; to pass without being obstructed; as,
to get over difÞculties: also, to recover; as, to get over sickness. - verb intransitive - TO ARRIVE
AT ANY PLACE OR STATE; followed by some modifying word, and sometimes implying
difÞculty or labor… (Webs1828)

—=—

And so this gives us a lot to ponder, if nothing else, and certainly changes the meaning and intent
of this so-called “creation” story to one not necessarily of True Source, not of Nature, and certainly
not of “God” as the timeless Creator Jehovah. It certainly cannot and should not be dismissed, and
I would invite the reader to explore these translations thoroughly, always seeking what is self-
evident as opposed to what is comfortable for the ego and id-entity.

For now, let us take a quick tour of the “Genesis” story as translated to reveal what can only be
called a mystifying conundrum.

First and foremost, this is not the “Book of Genesis,” but rather the “Book of Moses.” But, since the
term Genesis was added later as the description of this Þrst Book of Moses, the lawgiver, let us use
what we in dog-Latin are accustomed to, knowing that this is thethe
book of of
book a man, notnot
a man, of of
Jehovah
Jehovah
bearing some timeline before man’s actual Existence that man could not have in any way
witnessed. One cannot bear witness the Creation of himself, nor to the very substance of Life (light,
air, water, vegetation, etc) that might sustain him. More on the history of this naming discrepancy
will be revealed in Volume 2.

The concept presented so mysteriously in Genesis 1:1 referred to as ÒIn the beginningÉÓ is in itself
a reference to the notion of the word “when” in time, as former times or a former state, Þrst fruits
(Þrst born), or as a principal or thing of dignity. The term in the beginning, from Strong's H7225 -
re’shiyth - is the same as saying when an event Þrst happened. But it does not imply in any way that
nothing Existed before that event, as if Jehovah (Existence) Itself was begun in time (history) at this
point, as if man would have been Living at or before the time the environment that would sustain
his very Life was suddenly Created. In short, man cannot and will never know the story of his own
origin, nor are we supposed to. The notion that this concept of “the beginning” could possibly be
recorded or even comprehended by man when man is the much later object of that creation is of
course a purely fallacious view, and yet one promoted often by the corporate church. What witness
was present at this creation event if no men were yet created? And if man did witness his own
creation, then was he miraculously born with language skills to record his own event and all that
happened previous to that birth, though he was but a helpless zygote? The unanswerable nature of
these questions would, after all, imply that man was there (pre-history) and able to record his own
Creation and with an already developed language and understanding of things, or worse, that man 




!363
is therefore his own Creator. Surprisingly, this is not far from the false doctrinal truths of many of
man’s corporate religions. For it would also imply that man was born with such language skills,
with words and grammar, which we know are not of Nature but are of course a creation of man.

What is most interesting about this so-called “story of creation” is that within this book of Genesis
are at least two competing stories about that creation. We Þnd that Adam (man and woman) is
created in one story as that which is in the image of the gods (elohim). Yet in the next story, which in
Genesis Chapter 2 is said to be after the seven ÒdaysÓ of creation, including that of Adam (man-
kind), we Þnd man being again created from a swirl of the dust of the earth.

Did something happen to the Þrst creation of man? Or was there something else going on here that
is not clear in the KingÕs translations?

For notation, the uncapitalized word adam is also used as the translation for the word person(s),
though here the same word is used for man:

—=—

“And God (Elohim) said, Let us make man (adam) IN OUR IMAGE,
AFTER OUR LIKENESS: and let THEM have DOMINION over the Þsh
of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all
the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So
God (Elohim/ the gods) created man (adam/man-kind) in his own image,
in the image of God created he him; MALE AND FEMALE CREATED
HE THEM.”
—Genesis 1: 26-27, KJB

—=—

The gods ÒcreatedÓ THEM (male and female men) in THEIR own image. The gods are referred to
here as “our,” as a plurality of or multitude of gods. But there are some problems here. Firstly, this
would imply that man already Existed in some form and substance, so that an image would be
available for such a task as this simulation of man. If man wasnÕt already Existing, then where did
the image of man come from? And since we are baking the noodle here, if the gods claim man to be
in their own image, then how are these gods not already Existent men? Bottom line: this would not
be the story of the Original Creation of man at all, but instead the story of the re-creation of a slave
race of persons (idols/images/personas) to serve the plurality of gods that are but a body
corporate (artiÞcial person) of falsely entitled men, which in the US we call as our false god Òthe
People.” When we are summoned to court, it is usually by “the People” of some State, though no
men or persons are ever listed as being those so-called private ÒPeople.Ó In other words, we cannot
face our accuser, our god, for it is but a pluralistic Þction. ÒThe PeopleÓ is not really them or any of
us, it is just a word meaning a pluralistic god (creator) like ÒElohim.Ó

Secondly, we Þnd that the term after his kind is used towards the creation of all other beasts, plants,
and other Life forms that are generated (reproduced/begotten) by its own kind. The term Òafter its
kindÓ here is a scientiÞc reference to species or sort, from Strong's H4327 - miyn, or “kind.” But if
this is Truly the Creation story of GodÕs Creation of the Origin of Life as we know It, how can any-
thing being Created “in the beginning” already have a species or kind to be created from, including
us? How can man and beast already have a likeness, an image, or a species in the story of our Þrst
Creation? UnlessÉ this is after all not the story of Nature, of Jehovah at all, but of the Þctions (i.e.,
names) of the gods placed over Reality so that they may rule their own false creation? If this were a
story on the origin of virtual reality, this would be the “Genesis” of The Matrix.

!364
 —=—

“And God (Elohim/the gods) created great whales, and every living
creature that moveth, which THE WATERS BROUGHT FORTH
ABUNDANTLY, AFTER THEIR KIND, and every winged fowl AFTER
HIS KIND: and God saw that it was good… And God (Elohim/ the gods)
said, LET THE EARTH BRING FORTH THE LIVING CREATURE
AFTER HIS KIND, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth
AFTER HIS KIND: and it was so.”
—Genesis 1: 21 and 24, KJB

—=—

And then, like a horror story for Mother Nature and its multitude of Creatures, “man” is instructed
by the gods (the source of man’s image/person) to do horrible things to the rest of Creation, to
subdue and dominate it and expand the human race, with no mention of being its steward or care-
taker, or of even respecting It by Nature’s (God’s) Law. Where is the harmony of Oneness? Where is
the spiritual connection to Source and Law? This is certainly not the story or Word (Law) of the Son
of Jehovah, the Creator, but of men acting as gods over their own creation, of the lesser kings of
men being ordered to expand empire by their gods, their own Þctional king of kings. And this in
every way explains why the New Testament Law of Jehovah is to replace this Old Testament Law
of the false gods and magistrates (elohim) of men.

—=—

“And God (Elohim/the gods) blessed them, and God (Elohim/the gods)
said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and REPLENISH the earth,
AND SUBDUE IT: AND HAVE DOMINION OVER the Þsh of the sea,
and over the fowl of the air, AND OVER EVERY LIVING THING
THAT MOVETH UPON THE EARTH.”
—Genesis 1:28, KJB

—=—

But wait a minute, why would man need to “replenish” the earth unless men already Existed on
earth in our own kind (species)? This does not make much sense, unless this is the “re-creation”
story of the gods, the creation of Þction, as the sending forth of the persons of men as agents of the
gods. This word replenish, as translated from Strong's H4390 - male’ - is generally used throughout
the Bible to mean the word Þll, as here to re-Þll (replenish). It can mean accomplish, furnish, have
wholly, and is even used to mean “mass themselves against” in the Hithpael. The land is “Þlled
with violence” in several chapters, and one is said to “Þll oneÕs heart” in several others. And we
Þnd the term ÒÞll the cause of the wicked” elsewhere. One can be said to be “full of words” and
the Earth was said to be as well “Þlled with violence.” The one thing common among these is that
they are all allegorical and speciÞcally metaphoric, as a descriptive poetic verse.

REPLENISH - (…) - verb intransitive - TO RECOVER FORMER FULLNESS. (Webs1828)

—=—

!365
Though nothing about this Þrst chapter reveals Jehovah or the True Source of NatureÕs Creation in
any Real sense, we are certainly lead to believe and take literally its words as ÒGod-givenÓ by the
church and state (legal gods) that translated it into this vulgar dog-Latin. Yet none of this story is as
of yet self-evident, as the True Word of God must be. In other words, this Þrst chapter cannot be
taken as the Law (Word) of Jehovah simply because Jehovah is nowhere within it. And of course
these facts lead to all sorts of theories about ancient alien astronauts that seeded the Earth and
many other planets with hu-man Life, that man-like gods from outer space are our actual creators,
mad scientists that grow us like cattle only to harvest us for lunch or slave labor once our
population numbers reach optimal harvesting. And this can turn into an endless, pointless
discussion about the origin of those aliens and their God(s).

Fortunately, the Bible teaches me to challenge all that is not the self-evident, self-Existent Truth,
especially that which comes from man, from words, and from vain speculations and arts. It allows
me the humility to worship only what is Real and not what is Þction. It instructs me then to Live in
only that Truth, which is another word for Jehovah, for Nature, and for Life Itself. But most of all it
comforts me that I should never feel the want to know these mysteries, for I need not know these
things to be happy in the abundance of Nature. It is only those seeking godship that need these
answers, and it is they who make them up as they go, just as the pagan Roman culture and Caesar
adopted its own pagan form of ÒChristianityÓ to appease the ego but leave the soul barren of
spirituality and Law. For there was no pope until the corporate church created that ecclesiastic
ofÞce. And it claims today that the apostle Peter (St. Petra) was indeed the Þrst antichristos pope,
the immortal ofÞce of replacement Christ.

PETER, PETEREL, PETERPENCE - noun - A TAX OR TRIBUTE formerly paid by the

English people to the pope; being a penny for every house, payable at Lammas day. It was
called also Romescot. (Webs1828)

—=—

ThatÕs right, St. Petra (Simon Peter) is claimed by the Roman Catholic Church to be the Þrst pope,
and that he was even appointed as such by the man Jesus christ himself. The word petra in its
feminine grammar means rock, as the rock this church will be built upon. As with all purposeful
mistranslations in the Catholic matrix of self-aggrandizing texts, and as we will discuss, the word
ÒchurchÓ is not a building but the totality of Lawful men (sheep) under the fear (action/works) of
GodÕs Law/Son (shepherd), and of course no man is actually, in Reality, a rock. But since Peter
means tax, one could conclude that ÒPeterÓ (taxation/extortion) is certainly the metaphoric rock
that the church was built upon in all its unrepentant wealth and pomp. And so we Þnd here that
the whole of the claim to fame and right of the ofÞce of Pope is that Jesus himself, as a Living man
in the Roman calendar and procession of historical time, appointed the Þrst ofÞce of Pope to an-
other Living man named Simon Peter. And you still wonder why the church insists that christ was
a historical event in its Roman calendar, despite no other historical reference to that Life Lived?
And with Life, of course, comes death, which is what the church Truly celebrates, for the existence
of the ofÞce of replacement christ (pope) depends not on the Life but on the death of Òthe manÓ
Jesus christ, and for that matter, of his apostles. And so the followers of the pope (antichristos/
replacement of christ) follow not the Word of God, which is the story of GodÕs Natural Law
personiÞed as the story of the Son of Jehovah, but instead follow the christos as a mortal man whose
namesake is still living and continuously making new and wicked Cannons, Bulls, and Laws. To
say that the Catholics purposefully missed the point of the story of Jesus christ is the
understatement of the age!

But let us continue not with the creation of this false Christ character into the pretended immortal,
corporate ofÞce of ÒpopeÓ and its centuries of crimes against man and Nature, but with the mythos
of the creation story as told in the Old Law and Testament.

But hold on a minute! For in the second chapter of Genesis we Þnd an apparently second and
opposing ÒcreationÓ story of man (as adam). But this time, we Þnd that it is the monotheistic God

!366
(Jehovah) as the One doing the Creating, and speciÞcally by transliterated name. The difference
here seems to be that man is now the ÒgenerationÓ of actual Creation, of Nature after it was already
fully formed in Its Existence to the point where Nature might actually support the Life and needs
of man.

But this Old Testament story Þrst represents the story of Creation as that of the false gods, and that
only after this creation myth do we Þnd the entrance or Existence of Jehovah as Creator, which
again is deÞned as the actual God (Being) of Existence/Creation.

In the Þrst three verses of Chapter Two, we again Þnd only the word Elohim. But then, out of
nowhere, and only after this supposed 6-day event of Creation in Chapter One do we Þnd mention
of Jehovah:

—=—

“Thus the heavens and the earth WERE FINISHED, AND ALL THE
HOST OF THEM. And on the seventh day God (Elohim, the gods)
ENDED HIS WORK which he had made; and HE RESTED on the
seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God (Elohim,
the gods) blessed the seventh day, and sanctiÞed it: because that in it he
(the gods) had rested from all his work which God (Elohim, the gods)
created and made.”
—Genesis 2: 1-3, KJB

—=—

It is a fairly ridiculous, even human notion to ponder that Existence, that Nature Itself (Jehovah)
needs a day off, or that one day is more sacred than another in the endless cycle of the timeless
ages. But the Old Law and Testament of the gods (Elohim) says this custom (a day of rest) must be
done ritualistically. Meanwhile, the New Testament tells us to abandon such pagan and Jewish
rituals and rites, for they are nothing to the Timeless Reality of Jehovah. There is no ÒSundayÓ or
ÒTuesdayÓ in Nature, and in fact these are merely the remnants of celebration of the Roman gods.
These astrological days of the week are the mythological celebration of the god Sol (the Sun) day
and the god Tyr or Tiw (Mars) day, just as the names of other days of the week and of the months in
the year are in their devotion to Òthe heavens.Ó

But I remind the reader again, especially the nihilistic skeptics out there, that these customs and the
astrological naming of things has nothing to do with the Bible. Again, do not allow manÕs religious
nonsense to interfere with what is the Reality of the self-evidence of the Word (Law) of God. Do not
mix sense with nonsense!

And whom else but man in his constant search for ease would give himself every other day off
from worshiping GodÕs Nature but that one day per week? If Jehovah didnÕt show up for work
every single day, if the sun did not shine and the rains fall and the rivers ßow, weÕd have all turned
up dead upon Its Þrst sick day. The Truth is that the very Nature and Word (Law) of Life simply
has no time off, and every cycle of the sun and moon is no more or less Sacred than the last or the
future ones. And the thought that man might have all dayÕs but Sunday free from God (Reality) is
not at all in line with the Nature of our Existence. All days are Holy, sacred gifts from God. And
none of them should be used to support false gods and the nations and kingdoms they have built
for themselves. All days are precious, and every moment of oneÕs Existence in this Life should be in
thankfulness and worship of that which begat that Life and Its Law.

!367
But now, from this point onward in Chapter Two, the story changes as we are apparently given
over to the “LORD God,” translated as “Jehovah Elohim.” And so now the Genesis story of
Creation actually appears to refer to Creation and Nature Itself as “God,” as a Living Entity called
as the name for the verb Jehovah, for the heavens and earth were ÒÞnishedÓ at this point and the
gods (Elohim) rested and ended their work.

Now, from this point, we Þnd the story of the Creation of Jehovah, as the Natural Creation. This
now becomes the story of what Nature’s God (Jehovah; a verb) generates, now that Nature was
Created by…?

—=—

“These are the GENERATIONS of the heavens and of the earth WHEN
THEY WERE CREATED, in the day (age) that the LORD God (Jehovah)
made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the Þeld before it
was in the earth, and every herb of the Þeld before it grew: FOR THE
LORD GOD (JEHOVAH) HAD NOT CAUSED IT TO RAIN UPON
THE EARTH, AND THERE WAS NOT A MAN TO TILL THE
GROUND.”
—Genesis 2: 4-5, KJB

—=—

“And the LORD God (Jehovah) FORMED MAN OF THE DUST OF

THE GROUND, AND BREATHED INTO HIS NOSTRILS THE
BREATH OF LIFE; AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL. And the
LORD God (Jehovah) planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he
put the man whom he had formed.”
—Genesis 2: 7-8, KJB

—=—

So let me get this straight… Man is created in the image of the pluralistic “god” (Elohim), that is
“in OUR image,Ó and then somehow is formed again (for the Þrst time?) by the LORD God
(Jehovah Elohim) from the dust of the earth since there was apparently no men around to work the
Þelds? But how can this be? Just what is this ÒGodÓ of Chapter 1, and where do these pluralistic
gods in Chapter 2 go to “rest,” as we then suddenly call the creator God as Jehovah Elohim in
Chapter 2?

Is this truly the paradoxical story it appears to be, or are we simply missing the bulk of the full
story here?

This polytheism (paganism) is not an issue in the Hindu religion, for instance, as it is in the
Christian churches, which of course decide what to believe and force others to believe in faithful
sameness and ignorance. To suggest that the Genesis account is the story of two different gods
therefore is taken as, at the very least, blasphemous… not to the Bible of course, but to the
corporate churchÕs own doctrines and ÒofÞcial written beliefs.Ó And so honest conversation and
comprehension about the Bible is next to impossible.

!368
Yet this dualistic, pluralistic, polytheist creation mythos explains perfectly and gives clarity and
reason as to why the people of Mesopotamia in the Old Testament still worshiped multiple
Babylonian gods as the Bible story goes. And so in fact it is entirely unreasonable not to pick apart
this rather incomplete and obtusely translated story of the creation of the gods. I was surprised to
learn myself that most Bible “scholars” indeed consider there to be at least two creation stories in
Genesis by two different forms of “gods.”

I would remind the reader that the Nature of Jehovah is timeless, having no beginning or end.
Creation is not, therefore, a mere event in history. Creation is the continuous and undying Source of
Life and Existence as it is forming or being born and dying even at this very moment, and again is
not merely just some event that happened at some point in time, being in Reality the timeless cycle
and passing on of all Life eternal.

So what is it that we are looking at here in this “Old Testament” of the old gods and their
Babylonian, Mosaic, written law? Is it possible that this creation story is not at all original to the
Bible, but instead merely the mythos of the plurality of many gods of the people Living at that
time? Can we thus distinguish christianity (the New Law) with the Jewish, Mosaic (Old Law) from
which these different, pluralistic concepts of God, Elohim and Jehovah, are worshiped? We have
already discovered that the very heart of the story and tenants of christianity is Truly that the word
Jesus Christ means “Jehovah is Salvation,” and that this monotheistic, religious Law of Nature is to
replace the pluralistic Old law against or the “covering up” of Nature; that the singular Oneness of
Jehovah is to replace the plurality and twisted nature of these old gods.

Before falling off the deep end in speculation and confusion, let us simply compare this dualistic
story of creation (Genesis/Source) with its closest cousin, the ancient Enuma elish, and see the
undeniable similarities between both. For to understand which gods (Elohim) were worshiped in
the Old Testament times, and so as to understand the source of this Old Testament and Mosaic
(unspiritual) law, we must certainly study and become familiar with the gods of Babylon as
mentioned prominently in the Old Testament. To ignore the enemy or what is evil is to never
comprehend the purpose of that good which is opposes it.

As you read along here, notice the stark similarities to the Bible’s Genesis story, from the separation
of the Þrmament (waters) to the formation of all things to the fact that nothing in Creation was
named. Notice too that by the end of this story, the Nature of Life seems to be covered up by the
monstrous, four-eyed god Marduk, who became the creator (god) and thus law-maker. But
remember most of all that we are only seeking the Truth here so that we may discover how to Live
under It. Thus it is a perfectly reasonable task for any follower of christ and the New Law to seek
the source of the Old Testament creation story by seeking the origins of the gods of that time, even
as they are listed in the Bible as the “old gods” to which christ and the New Law and Testament
must replace or fulÞll. We must know what we are trying to defeat in order to constantly defeat it,
for it is always waiting to inÞltrate back into our Òreligions.Ó And in case you havenÕt noticed, there
doesn’t seem to be much of christ’s teachings being practiced within the modern nations and under
mammon…

To be clear, by examining the structure and names of the pluralistic gods as written in this Þrst
chapter of the Bible, we are not belittling the “Genesis” creation story of the Bible but instead
verifying its source as part of the Old Law. This is merely an honest examination and comparison
of the speciÞcally named religious gods that the Babylonians clearly spoke of by name as the gods
being worshiped at that time in the story of the Old Testament. Only by studying the worship of
these old gods may we understand why Þrst the Old Mosaic Law and then the fulÞlling New Law
of Nature in christ was needed to replace these false, non-self-evident gods of Babylon (the gods
created by men). This is not blasphemy, but a justiÞcation for the New Law/Son of God over the
Old. For nothing of this Enuma elish nor of the Genesis account rings of the self-evidence of Nature
and Its Law, of physics, of science, of reason, nor even of proper sequential order.

!369
We must consider that, without a possible doubt, the story of True Creation came before man, and
that this Truth of Creation simply and reasonably cannot have been known and witnessed by men.
Man could not have been there as witness either for his own Creation nor for that of the very
environment and Nature that allows for and sustains his Life. Even as a principle of law and of
science it is said that one may never Truly know or dis-cover the Source of self-Existence (e.g.,
Nature, Life), and that the Creation of the “Heavens and the Earth” as a Reality cannot therefore be
told but through the fabled imaginations of men.

So let us compare now the Bible’s Genesis to the fabled his-story of the Babylonian gods:

The Babylonian Creation Story (Enuma elish):

Like the Greek Theogony, the creation of the world in the Enuma elish begins with the universe
in a formless state, from which emerge two primary gods, male and female:

When the skies above WERE NOT YET NAMED

Nor earth below PRONOUNCED BY NAME,
Apsu, THE FIRST ONE, THEIR BEGETTER,
And MAKER Tiamat, WHO BORE THEM ALL,
Had mixed their waters together,
BUT HAD NOT FORMED pastures, nor discovered reed-beds;
WHEN YET NO GODS WERE MANIFEST,
NOR NAMES PRONOUNCED, NOR DESTINIES DECREED,
THEN GODS WERE BORN WITHIN THEM. (Dalley 233)

Apsu, the MALE "begetter," is the sweet waters, while Tiamat, the FEMALE "maker," is the
bitter, salt waters. SWEET AND SALT WATER MINGLE TOGETHER AT THE MOUTHS
OF THE TIGRIS AND EUPHRATES RIVERS, SITE OF THE ORIGINS OF
MESOPOTAMIAN CIVILIZATION. Some translators see the word "maker" in line 4 not as
an adjective describing Tiamat but as another god, named Mummu, who emerges at the same
time. As you might expect, Mummu means "MAKER," "FORM," "MOLD," or "MATRIX."
Besides being Apsu's vizier (meaning: vocalized word, term, name), Mummu is the mold or THE
UNDIFFERENTIATED SUBSTANCE FROM WHICH THINGS ARE MADE. Like Eros at
the beginning of the Theogony, this Mummu-power IS NECESSARY TO GET THE JOB OF
BIRTH-CREATION GOING. Stephanie Dalley notes that, "the bit-mummu was the term for a
workshop that produced statues of deities" (274). N. K. Sandars, however, sees mummu as
potential, or entropy (27). IN THIS EARLY PERIOD, NOTHING IS NAMED YET
BECAUSE NOTHING HAS APPEARED OR BEEN CREATED YET. Notice that pasture-land
must be formed--wrested from the desert by the hard work of digging and irrigation (in other
words, formed by men). The reed-beds mentioned in line 6 are handier than one might think: in
southern Iraq today, the marsh dwellers live and work in ßoating houses and boats made from
the reeds in the reed-beds. The "destinies" mentioned in line 8 are somewhat like the Sumerian
me--CULTURAL PATTERNS AND WAYS OF LIVING.

After the waters of Apsu and Tiamat mix, the gods Lahmu and Lahamu ("SLIME, MUD")
emerge. And from this pair come Anshar ("whole sky") and Kishar ("whole earth"), meaning
perhaps "the horizon, the circular rim of heaven and the corresponding circular rim of
earth" (Jacobsen 168). Anshar and Kishar give birth to Anu, the sky god, who in turn BEGETS
what one translation calls "HIS LIKENESS" (Heidel 18) Ea, THE TRICKSTER GOD of the
ßowing waters, who is familiar to us as Enki. The following GENEALOGICAL CHART
summarizes the creation so far:
 
Males:
Apsu (sweet primeval waters)
Lahmu ("slime," "mud") 
Anshar ("whole sky")

!370
 Anu ("sky") 
Nudimmud ("image fashioner"--another name for Ea or Enki).

Females:
+ Tiamat (salt primeval waters)
+ Lahamu (perhaps both mean “silt”?) (dust?)
+ Kishar ("whole earth"--"horizon"?)
no female partner named

…Thorkild Jacobsen interprets this passage like this: "with the birth of the new gods, a new
principle, movement, activity--has come into the world" (170). Finally, Apsu and his vizier
Mummu go before Tiamat; Apsu suggests that since the noise keeps him from sleeping, he will
destroy the young gods, “Abolish their ways” (Dalley 234). Tiamat responds furiously, “How
could we destroy / what we (ourselves) have brought into being?” (Jacobsen 171). Despite her
objections, Apsu and Mummu plot to do away with the younger gods. However, the clever Ea
overhears them and concocts a plan to defeat them. Ea makes and recites a magic spell that
puts Apsu to sleep and Mummu in a daze. Ea then takes Apsu's insignia of power, his belt, his
crown, and his "mantle of radiance," and puts them on himself. He holds Apsu down and kills
him. Then he:

Tied up Mummu and laid across him.

HE SET UP HIS DWELLING ON TOP OF APSU,
And grasped Mummu, held him by a nose-rope.
When he had overcome and slain his enemies,
Ea set up a triumphal cry over his foes.
THEN HE RESTED very quietly inside his private quarters
And named them Apsu and assigned chapels,
Founded his own residence there... (Dalley 235)

Like a captive slave, Mummu is led by a nose-rope. Ea's "private quarters" are a combination
temple and house, built over the sweet waters he controls. It is here that the chief
Babylonian god, Marduk, is born to Ea and his wife Damkina.

Unlike the Theogony, which was put together by an individual independent poet, THE
ENUMA ELISH WAS AN OFFICIAL RITUAL TEXT, RECITED EVERY APRIL ON THE
FOURTH DAY OF THE BABYLONIAN NEW YEAR FESTIVAL. This festival went on for
eleven days: on the Þfth day, a ram was sacriÞced, "and the priest who performed the sacriÞce
[was] sent out into the wilderness, not to return till after the days of the festival [were]
over" (Sandars 49). On the evening of the Þfth day, the king of Babylon would humble
himself before the statue of the chief god Marduk and then would lead a procession of all the
gods outside the city gates and back again. Scholars are uncertain which rituals were
performed in the remaining days of the festival, but perhaps some sort of "sacred marriage"
between the king and the goddess Ishtar was enacted. On the eighth and eleventh days of the
festival, the gods were summoned to "Þx the destinies" of the universe (Sandars 37). Spring
was and still is harvest and threshing time in Iraq, while "the summer season, when Tammuz
[Dumuzi] died and was mourned" was "the parched 'dead season' of a hot country" (Sandars
45). Since spring ßoods were unpredictable, the Enuma elish may celebrate the taming of the
waters that make agriculture and life possible in this dry region.

The poem certainly celebrates a god who is new to us, Marduk. He was originally a local
Babylonian god who was raised to chief god status when the city of Babylon conquered all
of Mesopotamia. Earlier versions of the story may have featured Enlil as the hero, but since
this is an ofÞcial epic, the ofÞcial god Marduk must be exalted. (Later, when Assyria
conquered Babylon, the Assyrian scribe SIMPLY REPLACED MARDUK'S NAME WITH
THAT OF HIS CHIEF GOD, ASHUR.) Marduk's name means "'son-child' or 'son-of-the-
sun'" (Sandars 32) or perhaps "bull calf of the sun." Marduk is more powerful than his father,

!371
and his physical appearance is impressive: he is very large, with four large eyes and four big
ears, the better to see and hear everything. Fire blazes from his mouth when he speaks. His
proud and doting grandfather Anu creates the four winds for Marduk to play with, and soon a
group of unnamed gods goes to "their mother" Tiamat to complain about the resulting noise
and commotion:

"When they killed Apsu, your husband,

you did not march at his side, you sat still.
(Now someone) has created four fearsome winds,
your belly is roiled, so we cannot sleep.
Apsu, your husband, was not in your heart,
nor Mummu, who was bound! You kept apart!
You are no mother, you stir roiled around,
and we, who cannot go to sleep, us you do not love!" (Jacobsen 173)

(Paraphrase: [continued] And so Tiamat creates and gives birth to a great and terrible army of
monsters to defeat the other gods.)

At the head of this army, Tiamat places a god named Kingu, whose name may mean "unskilled
labourer" (Sandars 36). Tiamat also makes Kingu her second husband and gives him the
"Tablet of Destinies," on which the decrees of the gods are written and which symbolize
"supreme power over the universe" (Jacobsen 174). Kingu now has the power to Þx destinies.
According to N. K. Sandars, the Akkadian word for "destiny," shimtu, means rather more than
we mean by destiny, lot or fate; nor is it 'providence'. It includes the physical appearance,
attributes and inßuence--the whole nature--of a person or a thing (for objects like precious
stones have their shimtu); and it includes their place in the grand design of the universe. TO
'FIX DESTINIES' IS TO HAVE POWER, NOT ONLY OVER EVENTS, BUT OVER THE
PHYSICAL NATURE OF THE WORLD. (37)

THE BEGINNING OF THE WORLD WAS A TIME BEFORE DESTINIES WERE FIXED, SO
BASICALLY MARDUK AND KINGU ARE FIGHTING OVER THE POWER TO SHAPE
THE UNIVERSE. As Tiamat tells Kingu when she gives him the Tablet: "Your utterance shall
never be altered! YOUR WORD SHALL BE LAW!" (Dalley 238)…

Marduk promises Anshar, "You shall soon set your foot on the neck of Tiamat!" Pleased with
this answer, Anshar urges Marduk to set out right away and "quell Tiamat with your pure
spell" (Dalley 243). But Marduk has one condition--the gods must convene a meeting and
proclaim Marduk top dog (or god):

My own utterance shall Þx fate INSTEAD OF YOU!

Whatever I create shall never be altered!
The decree of my lips shall never be revoked, never changed! (Dalley 244)

…The gods' moment of decision is described like this:

There was conversation, they sat at the banquet,

Ate grain, drank choice wine,
Let sweet beer trickle through their drinking straws.
Their bodies swelled as they drank the liquor;
They became very carefree; they were merry,
And they decreed DESTINY for Marduk their champion. (Dalley 249)

The gods then set up a throne for Marduk, and they proclaim: "MAY YOUR UTTERANCE
(WORD) BE LAW, YOUR WORD NEVER BE FALSIFIED” (Dalley 250). They give him
"KINGSHIP OVER THE TOTALITY OF THE WHOLE UNIVERSE" (Heidel 36)...

!372
(Paraphrase: The great war between the gods ensues, lead by Marduk, as he defeats and cuts Tiamat in
half.)

…After standing on Tiamat’s corpse, he easily defeats the rebel gods, capturing most of them
and smashing their weapons. He ties the arms of the monsters and leads them away with
nose-ropes. He grabs the Tablet of Destiny away from Kingu and fastens it to his own
breast. MARDUK THEN PROCEEDS TO CREATE THE UNIVERSE FROM TIAMAT’S
BODY:

He sliced her in half like a Þsh for drying:

HALF OF HER HE PUT UP TO ROOF THE SKY,
Drew a bolt across and made a guard to hold it.
Her waters he arranged so they could not escape. (Dalley 255)

Notice that the sky is seen here as solid, holding back the waters. Marduk then levels and
measures Ea’s dwelling the Apsu AND BUILDS HIS OWN TEMPLE IN THE SKY AS A
MIRROR IMAGE OF THE APSU. Then he sets up the constellations as stations in the sky
for each of the greatest gods. FROM TWO RIBS of Tiamat, Marduk creates east and west,
and with her liver, he creates THE POLE STAR. He also creates the sun and moon and
organizes their daily and monthly cycles. From Tiamat’s spittle, he forms clouds, rain, and
fog. Heaping a mountain over Tiamat’s head, he pierces her eyes, from which spring the
sources for the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. (In Akkadian, inu means both "eyes" and
"springs.") In a similar way, he heaps mountains over her udder, piercing it "to make the
rivers from the eastern mountains which ßow into the Tigris. Her tail he bent up to the sky
to make the Milky Way, and her crotch he used to support the sky" (Jacobsen 179).

Marduk returns from CREATING THE UNIVERSE, leading the captive gods and monsters
before the gods. He presents the Tablet of Destiny to Anu and then makes statues of the eleven
monsters, setting them up "at the door of Apsu" (Dalley 257). The gods are extremely pleased
with Marduk, so they arrange a reception for him at which they all come forward to kiss his
feet. They invest Marduk with the regalia of his ofÞce--such as THE CROWN, THE SCEPTRE,
and "THE MANTLE OF RADIANCE"--and they proclaim him KING OF THE GODS of
heaven and earth. Marduk proclaims that he will create his own dwelling-place between the
skies of heaven and the waters of the Apsu and invites the gods to stop by on their way up or
down. He decides to name his new dwelling-place BABYLON, which means "gate of god."
The gods bow down to him, repeating their praises and promising to obey his command.

Now Marduk decides to "perform miracles"—he outlines his plan to Ea:

Blood I will mass and cause bones to be.

I WILL ESTABLISH A SAVAGE, ‘MAN’ shall be his NAME.
Verily, SAVAGE-MAN I WILL CREATE.
HE SHALL BE CHARGED WITH THE SERVICE OF THE GODS
THAT THEY [THE GODS] MIGHT BE AT EASE! (Pritchard 36)

Ea suggests a slight alteration to the plan: THEY SHOULD DESTROY ONE OF THE REBEL
GODS AND CREATE HUMANS FROM HIM. When Marduk asks the gods who "incited
Tiamat" and started this war, they answer as one, "Kingu!" So Ea takes Kingu, cuts his arteries,
and MAKES MANKIND FROM HIS BLOOD. Ea then imposes the toil of the gods upon
mankind, while Marduk divides the gods up and assigns them their various positions in
heaven or earth. In gratitude to Marduk, the gods decide to build Babylon, and set about
making bricks and raising Marduk’s temple-ziggurat, called the Esagila. Then they build their
own shrines.

Marduk invites the gods to a big feast in his new home. At the feast, ALL DESTINIES ARE
FIXED, including "the seven destinies of the cult." Marduk gives the bow that slew Tiamat to

!373
 the gods, and Anu is so pleased that he makes the bow an honorary god and gives it (her) a
seat at the assembly of gods. The gods SWEAR FEALTY to Marduk, "by touching their
throats WITH OIL AND WATER" (Jacobsen 182). After Anshar orders the worship of
Marduk by "the black-headed people," the gods conÞrm MardukÕs kingship and mastery by
chanting his FIFTY NAMES.

—Grand Valley State University website, entitled ‘The Babylonian Creation Story (Enuma elish),’ with these works cited:
• Dalley, Stephanie, ed. and trans. Myths from Mesopotamia. New York: Oxford UP, 1991.
• Heidel, Alexander, ed. and trans. The Babylonian Genesis. Chicago: U of Chicago Press, 1951.
• Jacobsen, Thorkild. The Treasures of Darkness: A History of Mesopotamian Religion. New Haven: Yale UP, 1976.
• Pritchard, James B., ed. The Ancient Near East, Volume 1: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1958.
- - - Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1955. Abbreviated ANET.
• Sandars, N[ancy] K. Poems of Heaven and Hell from Ancient Mesopotamia. New York: Penguin, 1971.

—=—

Needless to say, this sounds a lot like the Þgurative story of the Roman Empire, its Pope, and its
infallible papal war powers. Take away the names of the gods and the details of their jealous battle,
and we are essentially left with the Þrst couple of chapters of Genesis (real title: “the Book of
Moses”). Makes a bit too much sense to ignore.

Notice as well here the almost exacting story lines between the Enuma elish and the dumbed-down
Biblical Creation story, where the gods seem to cover up the True Nature of all Creation and set up
their own false, legalistic existence and authority over It. At this point, the Chapter 1 story of
Genesis sounds more like the attempted defeat of Nature with artiÞce than the Creation of It. In
this seemingly dumbed down version translated by the king (god) and only modernly called as
Genesis, we seem to Þnd the same battle between man and Nature, between the God that is Nature
and man's desire to conquer (purchase), name (own), and thus control all things within it as
property of the gods.

MERODACH - Death; slaughter, the name of a Babylonian god, PROBABLY THE PLANET
MARS (Jer 50:2), or it may be another name of Bel, the guardian divinity of Babylon. THIS
NAME FREQUENTLY OCCURS AS A SURNAME TO THE KINGS OF ASSYRIA AND
BABYLON. (Easton’s Bible Dictionary)

BEL (BAAL) - Baal Lord. 1. The name appropriated to the principal male god of the
Phoenicians. It is found in several places in the plural BAALIM (Judges 2:11; 10:10; 1 Kings
18:18; Jeremiah 2:23; Hosea 2:17). Baal is identiÞed with Molech (Jeremiah 19:5). It was known
to the Israelites as Baal-peor (Numbers 25:3; Deuteronomy 4:3), was worshipped till the time
of Samuel (1 Sam 7:4), AND WAS AFTERWARDS THE RELIGION OF THE TEN TRIBES
IN THE TIME OF AHAB (1 Kings 16:31-33; 18:19, 22). IT PREVAILED ALSO FOR A TIME
IN THE KINGDOM OF JUDAH (2 Kings 8:27; comp. 11:18; 16:3; 2 Chronicles 28:2), till Þnally
put an end to by the severe discipline of the Captivity (Zephaniah 1:4-6). The priests of Baal
were in great numbers (1 Kings 18:19), and of various classes (2 Kings 10:19). Their mode of
offering sacriÞces is described in 1 Kings 18:25-29. THE SUN-GOD, UNDER THE
GENERAL TITLE OF BAAL, or "LORD," WAS THE CHIEF OBJECT OF WORSHIP OF THE
CANAANITES. EACH LOCALITY HAD ITS SPECIAL BAAL, and the various local Baals
were summed up under the name of Baalim, or "LORDS." Each Baal had a wife, who was A
COLOURLESS REFLECTION OF HIMSELF… (Easton’s Bible Dictionary)

—=—

Now let us be clear here that the God of the Bible Jehovah should in no way be confused with any
notion of these Baal gods. The confusion, which seems to be a purposeful obfuscation by those
adversarial (satanic) to christ’s teachings and thus to Jehovah, comes simply from the general
deÞnition of the uncapitalized word baal, which as stated above means “lord.” But we must re-
member that every word used in the old texts was purposeful, and that these words lord and god
were not arbitrarily used in the ancient writings in the way that the kingÕs translation is modiÞed.

!374
 —=—

“And THEY FORSOOK THE LORD (YĔHOVAH), AND SERVED BAAL

and Ashtaroth.”
—Judges 2:13, KJB

—=—

“And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye
BETWEEN TWO OPINIONS? IF THE LORD (YĔHOVAH) BE GOD,
FOLLOW HIM: BUT IF BAAL, THEN FOLLOW HIM. And the people
answered him not a word.”
—1 Kings 18: 21, KJB

—=—

“And he did evil in the sight of the LORD (YĔHOVAH), and walked in
the way of his father, and in the way of his mother, and in the way of
Jeroboam the son of Nebat, WHO MADE ISRAEL TO SIN: FOR HE
SERVED BAAL, AND WORSHIPPED HIM, AND PROVOKED TO
ANGER THE LORD GOD (YĔHOVAH ELOHIM) OF ISRAEL, according
to all that his father had done.”
—1 Kings 22: 52-53, KJB

—=—

It is clear that Jehovah and Baal, also named as Bel, are not the same God. One must always
question anything that places the God of self-evident Truth and Nature into question, good or evil.
Chances are the source of this type of conspiratorial lamentation is not the Bible. The real tough
question to contemplate is why we so strive to defeat and belittle that which we should be
protecting with our very Lives against any attack against it, as our very Existence depends upon Its
well-being. And as usual, public education and predominately Jewish-based Hollywood produced
entertainment can be found at the core of each answer.

Labeled as the ÒBabylonian GenesisÓ story of creation mythology, we Þnd of course within the
Enuma elish above remnants of these ancient gods being worshiped still within the opening books
of the Old Testament, as within the Biblical tales of Babylonia in Mesopotamia and of its king
Marduk (Mars, or Marodach), the god of death (mort) and slaughter (by war), and of many other
anciently, named, recycled, and renamed “gods.” Thus it cannot at all be incorrect to consider the
Enuma elish as that which the Genesis account was taken from and dumbed-down. The history laid
out already in the Old Testament, especially the accounts of these exact same gods being worshiped
in that Mesopotamian era, certainly conÞrm this to be the most likely ÒreligionÓ of the Babylonians.
In fact, it would be quite foolish to dismiss this fact. Off course, we have the New Testament telling
us as the new Law to let go of these old gods and to worship only the Creator God of Nature for
salvation by following, each of us, in christ’s example. Most importantly, we see the exact same
ritualistic, poetic stylings of verse in the Old Testament as we did in these earlier writings of the old
gods and their stories.

!375
 —=—

“The LORD (Jehovah) gave Jeremiah the prophet this message

concerning Babylon and the land of the Babylonians. This is what the
LORD (Jehovah) says:


“Tell the whole world, 

and keep nothing back. 

Raise a signal ßag
to tell everyone that BABYLON WILL FALL!
Her IMAGES and IDOLS will be shattered.
HER GODS BEL (Baal, Jupiter, as a “good demon”) 

and MARDUK (Mars) will be utterly disgraced…”
—Jeremiah 50: 1-2, New Living Translation Bible (NLT)

—=—

“The word that the LORD (Jehovah) spake AGAINST BABYLON and
against the land of the Chaldeans by Jeremiah the prophet.”

“Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard;

publish, and conceal not: say, BABYLON IS TAKEN, BEL is
confounded, MERODACH is broken in pieces; her IDOLS are
confounded, her IMAGES are broken in pieces.”
—Jeremiah 50: 1-2, KJB (same verses as above)

—=—

“And I will punish Bel in Babylon, and I will bring forth out of his
mouth that which he hath swallowed up: AND THE NATIONS SHALL
NOT FLOW TOGETHER ANY MORE UNTO HIM: yea, the wall of
Babylon shall fall.”
—Jeremiah 50:44, KJB

—=—

The reader of the Bible must ask this question: How can God punish and cause the ruination of
Babylon unless it was in fact Þrst created, unless it had a ÒGenesisÓ story?

Author’s note: Don’t ever trust any translated writings that are put forward and claimed to be
ancient scripts that also just happen to rhyme (poetically) in the English (dog-Latin) Language. This
is a self-evident impossibility and an obvious logical fallacy. To create a poem in Latin, Greek,
Hebrew, and especially in the old stone tablet Sanskrit and hieroglyphic typeset of ancient
languages and just happen to have it rhyme perfectly in its English translation Truly requires a fool
to believe in (love) that particular translation. Thus, when we read the verses of the Bible in

!376
English, it should seldom if ever rhyme in its translation, though it be written in verse (poetry).
And this is a good thing, for otherwise it would be instantly recognizable as pure trickery in its
translation! This rule surpasses the Bible and goes for all translations everywhere. Unfortunately,
this fact and the vulgar way that poetry has been taught to us also leads the reader to miss the
poetic nature of these books of the Bible and instead to take most or all things written within as
literal.

There is certainly a reason why the Vatican has been called as Babylon by many authors in history,
as the place where nations ßow together. And need we even mention here the United Nations being
its promoted, international corporate structure of choice?

We generally confound our individual ability to understand the Bible by rejecting the gods and
kingdoms and laws that came before it, forgetting that the religion of christ is the Newest and Last
will and testament to be taken above all others. But this certainly does not mean that all past
writings and teachings should be destroyed or banned somehow from knowledge. For without
them, the Old Testament cannot be understood to be what is opposed to christ in Jehovah. In other
words, to gain new knowledge based on disrupting the old knowledge, one cannot ignore the old
knowledge or the spirit and reason behind that new knowledge will be lost. Needless to say, in
order that its members would remain ignorant and without the True spirit of God's Word (Law),
the church bans these ancient works and hides them in its dark vaults.

The question we must pose here regarding this pluralistic god “Elohim” is a simple one:

Is the 1st Chapter of the Genesis creation story obvious and self-evident? Is it Truth? Is it God’s
Word (as that which is the unwritten Law)? Or are these the creations of man’s invention and
design?

In Chapter 1 we Þnd the formation of man from the ÒdustÓ of the earth.



But in Chapter 2 we read that man is a creation in the god’s image.

Which of these is reasonable, considering that the human body is compounded almost exclusively
of earthen minerals and water? This sounds like man is Created not only by but with the “dust” of
God (Jehovah). Then and only then was his breath given and his soul made Living. 



So then what was man in Chapter 1, if not a Living, breathing soul?

Something just doesn’t add up here. It’s as if we’re to believe that man, which is god or their image,
created Jehovah. It’s almost as if Chapter 1 should be Chapter 2.

Looking closer, we Þnd equally shocking discrepancies that cause our self-evidence meter to
plummet. For even the most rudimentary knowledge of the design of Nature tells us that this
Genesis of the heavens and the earth story is not the same as the Creation of all Nature story.

In the Þrst chapter of the Genesis account, we Þnd that somehow day and night are created on the
Þrst day, but the sun isn't created until the fourth day. Is this reasonable? Well, then consider that
the plants and trees are created on the third day, even before the much needed sunlight that would
cause them to live and subsist. Oh, and did I mention there was no water yet, that God made it rain
only after the seventh day of Creation, and thus not until Jehovah did so in Chapter 2?

One could say that the very Life of Jehovah, of the Existence of Life as we know it, depends on this
Þrst chapter being clearly an artiÞce, and not the True account of Creation. If light was shown on
the Þrst day but the sun only on the fourth, then perhaps we must remember yet again the deeper,
metaphoric nature of these accounts? After all, Jesus christ is also called as the “Light of the
World,” and even Lucifer is said to appear in its lying form as the “light.” I’d venture to say that I
don’t think this means that satan or christ appears each time a candle or a light bulb is lit up.

!377
While the author would certainly love to speculate further on this particular strangeness and the
many inconsistencies surrounding these Old Testament books, I will here digress again so that we
may continue only with what we may distinguish as the self-evident Truth. After all, the whole
point of the New Law is to fulÞll the Old.

—=—

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I AM

NOT COME TO DESTROY, BUT TO FULFILL.”
—Matthew 5:17, KJB

—=—

Indeed, the New Testament includes the 10 commandments in its teachings, fulÞlling them utterly.

We must not focus on the correctness of moral stories told in allegory and metaphor lest we delve
into the madness we already Þnd ourselves in, our own version of Babylonian societies under the
law of nations. We must learn from them as intended, so as to Þnd our Heaven on Earth. And how
can that be done with such confusion of source? Fortunately, the answer to that question is that it
cannot, for the Old books are Þlled with much fruitless information, fabled genealogies, and the
writings and laws of the gods of men. Clearly, not everything written in the Bible is meant to be
taken as that which is Real or actual history, but rather as a learning tool to distinguish between
those crazy gods of men (and therefore men as gods) and the God we may call as LORD, Jehovah,
as that which is the eternity of self-Existence and self-evident Creation. Of course, to tell a good
moral story, we always must have the good and the evil spelled out to us; the hero and the
adversary, the protagonist and the antagonist explained for context and under-standing. For what
is a hero without a threatening villain to conquer?

For the purposes of this work, let us merely remember to always distinguish between what is the
self-evidence of Reality (Jehovah) and what is the non-self-evidence of the stories of the gods of
men. With this knowledge, and with the knowledge that christ leads us in every way to only
Jehovah (Truth) and to no other false “god” built only of lies (words), we may now better under-
stand that the Law of Nature is the “unwritten” Law/Word/Son and surprisingly undeniable
Truth of God (Jehovah). It is the Law of Source, the glue that structures and holds all Life and Real
Existence together. It is anti-Þction, and therefore all other gods as creations of men are anti-christ
and thus anti-God. The word other seems not to Þt here, though, as if they can be compared in their
sameness to Reality. For if there is only One God then the notion of even acknowledging “other
godsÓ seems paradoxical. As there is but One Truth in the Reality of Nature, we cannot fall into the
trappings of these language arts by calling all the lies pretending to be Truths as “other truths.”
This seems ridiculous, as at some point we must come to realize that there is no choice. There Is
only one True God and only One True Truth. All others do not deserve to be compared and labeled
by such a sacred name or title. Again, the True Law may be summed up simply and eloquently as
the simple lifestyle-rule that man should always Live in Reality and in the Law of Nature (Source)
that he was born into. No sane and reasonable man can possibly argue against this as his religion, as
every man’s religiously followed Law.

While we will look closer at the meaning of all the names of each character in the Bible in later
Volumes, let us for now remember the importance of the creation of the names of persons, places
and things, for to be a god over art is to be its creator, and to be a law-maker one must be the
creator or principal agent of that which the artful law applies to.

We are all fooled by this word magic while acting unwittingly as public persons (each in our
artiÞcial, legally projected selves), believing that the word personal carries the same connotation as
the word private. But personal does not necessarily mean private. Its application depends on the

!378
legal status by which that false persona re-presents itself. A public person is property, having no
right to privacy other than that accorded by the creator government (creator/god of that Þctional
person as a legal status and mark), such as the personal right of copyright and patent, which is only
property of the state with exclusive use given to the surety for a limited time only in temporary
Þctional persona (surname) and jurisdiction (domain), often until legal death or for a certain time,
such as a legally set and enforced 70 years based on the Roman calendar of time. Personal in-
formation is merely information pertaining to the character and reputation of the Þctional entity we
legally call as a “natural person,” which in turn is only the property of the state used by an agent in
commerce between third parties. Therefore, personal information is not private, and is in fact
public information in the public domain — an act of informing by the man acting in the person
(commercial vessel) of the United States. Thus all court cases are published (public) when they
involve public persons of the United States, while private affairs are not privy to such public
(published) scrutiny.

Remember, in their legal world, this unpublished work you are reading does not exist! They will
not acknowledge or make legal (publish) what they do not own the name of.

Truly private information, on the other hand, is that which is opposed to personal information.
Private information is secret information; that which is not public and which is not registered
(taxed) or published (publicized). All Creations of God (as Jehovah) are private. Only the names and
descriptions legally forced upon and imaginarily (legally) attached to God’s Creation are public
and personal. For all of GodÕs Creation in Nature must be personiÞed (named, numbered, tagged,
and redeÞned) before the name can be made into property; before Creation can be legalized. The
self, the mirror image, must be personiÞed into a pretended, 3 dimensional legal form of Þction and
thus the man must be trained and educated to believe in his legal self (third person) over the Reality
of his Being (True Self).

A man is legalized when a persona is attached voluntarily to his Nature, or in other words, when a
debtor surname or ÒlastÓ name and other marks and signs are attached to his good, christian ÒÞrstÓ
name in a contract of performance under law. For man is a term of Nature, and person is a term of
art.

While God is the Creator of all Nature, including man, an entity that creates Þctional persons is
thus an artist, or more accurately, an artiÞcer. And this is the strange legal process of begetting or
birthing, of the legalization (re-creation) of the Natural self, the creation of Þctional persons whose
father (Caesar) is only ever the legal nation.

ARTIFICER - noun - [Latin artifex, from ars, and facio.] 1. AN ARTIST; a mechanic or
manufacturer; one whose occupation requires skill or knowledge of a particular kind; as a
silversmith, or sadler. 2. One who MAKES or CONTRIVES; an INVENTOR; AS AN
ARTIFICER OF FRAUD OR LIES. 3. A cunning, or artful fellow. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

LEGALIZE - verb transitive - 1. To MAKE LAWFUL; TO RENDER CONFORMABLE TO

LAW; TO AUTHORIZE. What can legalize revenge? 2. TO SANCTION; TO GIVE THE
AUTHORITY OF LAW TO THAT WHICH IS DONE WITHOUT LAW OR AUTHORITY.
Irregular proceedings may be legalized by a subsequent act of the legislature. (Webs1828)

—=—

Note here that to legalize is to pretend to make lawful. This means that any crime can be made
legally lawful, and yet we are instructed clearly to make and accept no other law than that of what
is the self-evident Word in scripture. Again, the Word of God is not merely the vulgarly translated
words as written by men, but the Truths drawn from them that cannot be denied in Nature
(Reality). The Source of Law is Jehovah (verb), while the source of legal law (adversarial doctrine)
is men. This reinforces the fact that what is legal is always antichrist/anti-God/anti-Nature. For 




!379
only Þction can be made legal, only the legal names (lies) put upon the realm of the Real can be
made legal. Never forget that only dead entities may be birthed from legal Þction, never a Living
soul.

Now, you tell me, do you really believe that there is such a thing in Reality as ÒlawfulÓ money? Or
have you merely been tricked by something that has been legalized to appear as lawful and self-
evident under God? A paradox generally appears true in fact, but legal facts are seldom in same-
ness with Truth. So do not let the word lawful fool you, when you know that anything to which the
gods see Þt may be legalized into artiÞcial lawfulness. Is the monetary value of gold and silver (in
mammon) in any way self-Existent (of GodÕs Law)? If your answer here is anything but no, please
go swim in your hoarded collection of chosen money (debt) one last time and start over at the
beginning of this work. Reason must trump lies, no matter how shiny and titillating their prima facie
appearance. The matrix of Þction never holds the promise of substance its reßected beauty may
shine.

It is difÞcult sometimes to see through so many illusions to arrive at the only Truth, but arriving
and thriving there is the only way to be Free within It. It is what is called as True Faith in God
(Reality), for Jehovah is all Truth and all Life and all self-Existence in Oneness. The Truth of the
legal person, that legally personiÞed and licensed artiÞcial, existential self, is that its sole purpose is
to sin under the protection of manÕs legalized law. A person is always artiÞcial, and so a man acting
in the person of another is always untrue to his own Nature, and therefore unfaithful to God. For
Faith and Truth are the same words. Truth can only be found in that which is Reality, in GodÕs
Creation of Nature alone. No other Truth is attainable for no other Truth Exists except in artiÞce,
where lies are legalized into accepted facts said to be truths. To have faith in artiÞciality over Reality
(self-existence) is to call lies as Truth (Faith). This is the worship of the sacred (cursed) nature of the
legalized church and state.

But to believe only in the Reality of all things without legalistic artiÞce, registered names, and
catalogued titles, this is Pure Faith in Jehovah. This is the only Truth. To acknowledge It without
knowing and respecting It is false religion. To act only within It and Its Law is the Love of Life.

—=—

“And ye shall know the truth,


and THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE.”
—John 8:32, KJB

—=—

“…I had not known sin, but by the law…


FOR WITHOUT THE LAW SIN WAS DEAD.”
—Romans 7:8, KJB

—=—

“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no ßesh be justiÞed in his
sight: FOR BY THE LAW IS THE KNOWLEDGE OF SIN.”
—Romans 3:20, KJB

—=—

!380
 —=—

“For SIN shall NOT have dominion over you: FOR YE ARE NOT
UNDER THE LAW, BUT UNDER GRACE.”
—Romans 6:14, KJB

—=—

“For I was ALIVE without the law once: but when the commandment
came, sin revived, and I DIED… FOR WE KNOW THAT THE LAW IS
SPIRITUAL: but I am carnal, SOLD UNDER SIN. For that which I do I
allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If
then I do that which I would not, I CONSENT UNTO THE LAW THAT
IT IS GOOD. Now then IT IS NO MORE I THAT DO IT, but sin that
dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my ßesh,) dwelleth no
good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that
which is good I Þnd not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil
which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, IT IS NO
MORE I THAT DO IT, but sin that dwelleth in me. I Þnd then a law,
that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the
law of God after the INWARD MAN: But I see another law in my
members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into
captivity to the law of sin which is IN MY MEMBERS. O wretched man
that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this DEATH? I thank
God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then WITH THE MIND I
MYSELF SERVE THE LAW OF GOD; BUT WITH THE FLESH THE
LAW OF SIN.”
—Romans 7: 9 & 14 & 16-25, KJB

—=—

Simply stated, the legal law allows and permits sin by license (anarchy) against God’s Law of
Creation and all Its Creatures. It is law without spiritual consciousness, allowing no room for moral
choice in its strict application. But God’s Law (Jehovah) never allows such sin for it allows no
methods or tools in artiÞce, and certainly no licenses around that Highest Law. It allows no un-
necessary harm under any circumstance. Only man’s law can make sin lawful through its legal
trickery and word magic, through legalization, for it provides a false persona for man to operate
positively in like a drone, as a ÒsinnerÓ in the ßesh without the harmony of spiritual (negative)
balance and without responsibility. When anything is declared as legal, it is actually declared as still
unlawful without possession in persona of a legal license to commit legalized crime. This is
positive law. It is the justifying of sin (syn) as law. In Nature, that which is Lawful is not spoken of,
not formed of words, for it is the unwritten (negative) Law, Being self-evident in its Existence and
so knowledgable without need of legal (anti-God), positive (legal) proof. That which is unlawful to
GodÕs Nature, which is of course as well self-evident, is merely commanded not to be done without
exception, and without false justiÞcation via legal (false) name and title in some pretend vessel of

!381
commerce and sin (synthetic life). And so choice rears its ugly head, as the temptation of the
artiÞcial law of persons clouds our judgement and mocks the Natural Law, changing it to the legal
law in promotion of commission and false forgiveness of sin. At no time is there ever innocence in
any choice, for voluntary ignorance is not innocence. There are no excuses. One cannot blame
Þction for breaking the Natural Law, as if one could blame the mirror image for the ugliness of its
Source. The Natural Law is self-evident, and breaking It can only mean that the Self is despoiled,
corrupted, and thus removed from its own Nature and foundation, as the Þctional, legal entity
(false persona) we pretend to become.

The mind apparently serves God, while without mental reserve the body serves mammon. Is this
not an oxymoron, a paradox, a psychotic break and disconnect from Reality? And yet is this not a
perfectly accurate description of the typical corporate ÒChristianÓ church-member in public citizen-
ship out there? The ßesh of artiÞciality as the legal skin of a person-hood is certainly no excuse for
not applying our mind to the actions of our body, nor is the legal law of licensure by men to break
with GodÕs Law a justiÞable excuse to break that Higher Law of Nature in spirituality. If the reader
may understand the above scripture, then the reader will perfectly understand the evil of person-
hood as citizenship, where the legal law of persons causes man to act against his own Nature as
that of Jehovah. The legal law of the person conquers the spiritual Law of the man of God. Cain kills
Abel. The power to purchase and use money (cain) kills the Natural ability of man (Abel). For such
legal license is not given by the corporate church and state to the man, only as an attachment to the
corporate (artiÞcial/on paper) person, the Þctional character under which the man acts in the
Þction of commerce (mammon). And the man acing in the person of another has not the ability to
work his own land without permission of its holder. Cain and Abel are merely two statuses of man,
one Real and one the legal persona of the Real. The able man and the unable purchaser (user).

—=—

“AN ILLEGITIMATE SON IS NOT ABLE to take by inheritance.”

ÑWebsterÕs 1828 dictionary, deÞnition of Ôable,Õ (Webs1828)

—=—

Man is either able or he is not. Cain represents the legal persona of the dependent, non-able,
marked man (in legal persona/mask). One has to respect such poetic, allegoric storytelling for its
elegance and self-evidence, causing us to think in ways we never even imagined before, and
allowing the end of generations of oppressive brainwashing, demonization, and literalist mis-
transliteration of these stories of the Law (Word). For in the Bible parable, only the able man (Abel),
who worked the land and shepherded his sheep without artiÞce, was accepted in his sacriÞces as
GodÕs son (follower). He who is possessed (Cain) by legal Þction makes no Self-sacriÞce but the
property (possession) of another lord (god).

Man simply cannot serve two masters. To attempt to serve both is an act of hypocrisy bordering on
insanity, a state of paradoxical, forced being that the legal system molds us into. To believe in (love)
God and the spiritual Law is not the same as knowing and acting with control (self-government) in
the ßesh against the secular world by adhering only to that spiritual Law against secular things.
The body is literally (by words) entrapped into the legal system through birth certiÞcation, through
education and entertainment, and Þnally through the actions of legalized and licensed adultery (as
apostasy, an adult-hood), the continuance and thus conÞrmation of the sin of false persona. We are
not to adorn such artiÞcial coverings, pre-tending and hiding behind such hoods over our True
Nature. For a Þctional, natural person is not a creation of and in Jehovah. The person may only ever
serve its legal creator (principal) and act in its purpose, which is only ever mammon (commerce).
The positive law of persons is simply the commercial law of money (valuation) and its use in usury.

The law of persons causes spiritual men to act according to the false law that regulates the puppet-
person to which we are voluntary agent and surety for, again under that all important maxim that

!382
the creator controls. The creator of the person (church and state) makes and enforces the law of the
person (citizen, member, alien enemy/friend, employee, etc.), whereas the Creator of man and all
of Nature as all the Permanence of Supreme Being causes the unwritten Law of Nature. While that
Law of God is self-evident, the law of man requires abandonment of self-evidence in lieu of a
Òlegally provableÓ false identiÞcation, in the form of surname, title, number, mark, taxation
(registration), address, and all other legal formalities (signs) that are created by the creators (gods)
of the artiÞcial law and doctrines over those Þctions of law (persons). Thus, the term acting in the
ßesh signiÞes purposeful ignorance of the Law of God. Inversely, legal law is the law of sin, or that
which regulates and gives license to Þctional persons in order that man may commit sins without
regard to his True Self and to the self-evident Natural and Instinctual Truth of GodÕs Law. And this
is why the scriptures repeatedly warn us that God, Jehovah, Nature, the Universe, as all Life as
Creation does not respect the Þction and artiÞce of persons and ßattering titles. When the person
breaks the Commandments, the spiritual Covenant, it is always only the actual Living man acting
in persona that actually commits the sin, despite the Þction he pretends to appear in. Man kills, not
the legal persona and title of “soldier” or “police” or “peace-keeper” he is hired to be. God sees and
respects no person, no license, no titles. No Þction can hide manÕs actions in Reality.

—=—

“In clear cases, HE MISTAKES WHO CITES LEGAL AUTHORITIES;

FOR OBVIOUS TRUTHS ARE NOT TO BE PROVED.” Applied to
cases too plain to require the support of authority; "because," says the
report, “HE WHO ENDEAVORS TO PROVE THEM OBSCURES
THEM.”
—IN REBUS MANIFESTIS, ERRAT QUI AUCTORITATES LEGUM ALLEGAT; QUIA PERSPICUA VERA NON SUNT PROBANDA. 5 Coke, 67a.
(Black4)

—=—

“In things that are favorable to the SPIRIT, though injurious to

THINGS, an extension of a statute should sometimes be made.”
—IN REBUS QUAE SUNT FAVORABILIA ANIMAE, QUAMVIS SUNT DAMNOSA REBUS, FIAT ALIQUANDO EXTENSIO STATUTI. 10 Coke, 101.
(Black4)

—=—

All things legal and artiÞcial are a sin against Nature, for the spirit is replaced and respected only
by the attached name/noun (of a person, place, or thing). Under the Natural Law and Reason this is
self-evident, that when a thing artiÞcial may harm something of spirit (of Reality), the thing of
artiÞce must be abandoned or destroyed in lieu of the spiritual Nature of all that is Real (all that
Exists without legal name/noun). Thus all artiÞce can only be in its potentiality against Jehovah
(the True Nature of the Permanence of Being in Creation). But be clear that in the legal (anti-
Nature) realm, the legal law will be upheld despite its harm to the spirit of man; to Nature or Its
Law. The spiritually dead has no respect for the Living. Its goal is to destroy.

So which corporations (artiÞcial persons) should the sons of God allow to exist and thrive under the
Natural Law? IÕd say the answer is clear. For like TolkienÕs Mordor rising, the corporate world is
already well into the process of destroying its creators, and replacing us with technology and AI in
both mind and body.

Of course, this presents somewhat of a paradox for man, a fallacy that can only be caused by
unreasonable religious belief. For it would be impossible for man to Exist without intruding upon

!383
the rest of God’s Creation in Nature, the very cycle and support system of Life. The solution to this
problem is the scriptural Law of Nature, the Natural Law as the Law of God; an instruction manual
for the sojourning soul. Man will inevitably “sin” against Nature’s Design as soon as his footstep
crushes a blade of grass, and this is also a self-evident Truth. And so at some point the spirit and
the body, the Nature (spirit) and the vessel, must in fact merge in harmonic symbiosis and sub-
stance due to man’s creativity and imagination. The moral, scriptural law is the blueprint for that
mergence, that trinity of mind, body, and soul, instructing man to Live harmoniously as christ
within Nature (Creation) even in his use (employment) and necessary sacriÞce (destruction and
victimhood) of It. Simply put, there is a right and a wrong way to Live, and each has a direct
impact not only on Nature, but on man’s ability to survive and thrive harmoniously within.
Survival requires pure consciousness and religious practice of the Highest Law without exception.
Legal personhood is Life lived in unconsciousness and without responsibility or respect for Life or
Nature, where artiÞcial persons (corporations) are given license to break with all Natural, morally
binding Law, and Ònatural personsÓ are given permission to not have to think for themselves nor to
protect their very own Nature of GodÕs Kingdom against such satanic (artiÞcial) forces as those
legalized corporate entities. Zombies are apparently not Þction, but the result of men following the
Þctions of law.

The semantic difference between the words personal and private is of the utmost importance, for
these terms of art carry contractual, legal weight whereas their equal “common” word terms do
not. A man acting in person suffers that all words he may speak are indeed personal (spoken in false
legal persona) and under a contractual nature, which means they are under the tacit contractual
relationship of that commercial entity of personhood in legal agency. His words are always public.
Thus we have the forced “right” to have anything we say in person used against us in the juris-
diction of the commercial courts. All words are public when used by public persons. Terms of art
are a rented, licensed language.

And so it must be comprehended by the reader that when a public person claims “privacy,” that
this is in actuality an oxymoron; a paradoxical misnomer that stems from our own fallacious mis-
taken identity. Quite simply, a public person has no ability to be a private One. Everything the
public person says and does will be used against it (man acting in persona through agency) in a
court of law because a public thing is never a Truly private thing. What is public is never that
which is not under public law. The use of the legal word (term of art) private upon public persons
changes the meaning of the word-spell “private,” and thus it carries about as much weight as it
would if a slave tried to be private while in subjection to his master upon his master’s plantation
while in his master’s chains and using his master’s tools. Public property is never private, and
man’s legal persona while in US citizenship is certainly and always acting in the agency of a public
ofÞce of employment (civil use) that beneÞts only the principal of that person (status). For without
the status of legal personhood, the man would not be insured to trade his labor for the re-
presentation of debt (money is charged only as an IOU that can never actually be paid off, only
legally dis-charged). We call those foreigners without assigned US public persona as “illegals,”
holding them in cultural contempt just as the house-slave might hold his fellow slave with less
beneÞts than him in a similar contempt of status. A United States citizenship nor its property is
never private. Sadly, we have no idea that as public US citizen-ships, we are just as foreign in each
state we reside in as any illegal immigrant, the only difference being that we have a streamlined,
temporary license and interstate passport (birth certiÞcation) to trespass upon the publicized,
federally entrusted lands of that State (People).

What belongs to man is private. What belongs to man’s assigned person is a public status. Yet both
of these may be described commonly (vulgarly) as personal. A man with no public persona (no
surname, title, number, mark, token, etc.) is his own self-Existent (Þrst) person (Self) independent
of all others, and his actions and property are thus personal and intentionally private. Thus, he is
always acting as his own property, his own Self. He has no other persona (mask). And so the word
person in Nature (without artiÞce) means nothing legal. A man acting in a public persona however,
where he assigns and registers all taxed property by that person (surname, etc.), is acting only in 




!384
public persona (personally), which changes the artful meaning of this word. We must therefore
understand this dualistic word-magic fully in order to be always on the side of True, non-legal
privacy (of the Source of Jehovah).

Here again, we have the noun versus the adjective. And in the noun form without substance, as the
name (noun) of some person, place or thing as Òproperty,Ó we Þnd that what is personal in name,
as what belongs to the estate of a person, is not immovable real estate but moveable property of an
estate. What is private, on the other hand, is of the man without public persona (without public
mark of surname and number). For the public person itself, as a United States citizen-ship, is
movable property of the United States. Ships at sea, after all, are not docked to the land, and so are
movable (personal) property instead of real (immovable) property just as game-pieces on a chess
board.

But none of this, remember, is in the Realm of Reality, and the rules of chess apply to only those
pawns (goyim) who play the legal game as if itÕs Real. The gods make the rules of Þction, and give
licensed, legalized sovereignty to themselves to break their own rules at any time under the law of
necessity.

PERSONAL - noun - A MOVABLE. (Webs1828)

PERSONAL - adjective - [Latin personalis.] BELONGING TO MEN OR WOMEN, NOT TO

THINGS; NOT REAL… 1. Relating to an individual; affecting individuals; peculiar or
proper to him or her, or to PRIVATE ACTIONS OR CHARACTER… 2. Pertaining to the
CORPORAL NATURE; exterior; corporal; as personal charms or accomplishments. 3.
PRESENT IN PERSON; NOT ACTING BY REPRESENTATIVE; as a personal interview…
(Webs1828)

PERSONAL ESTATE - In law, movables; chattels; THINGS BELONGING TO THE

PERSON; AS MONEY, jewels, furniture, etc. AS DISTINGUISHED FROM REAL ESTATE
IN LAND AND HOUSES. (Webs1828)

PERSONAL ACTION - In law, a suit or action by which A MAN CLAIMS A DEBT OR

PERSONAL DUTY, or damages in lieu of it; or wherein he claims satisfaction in damages
FOR AN INJURY TO HIS PERSON OR PROPERTY; an action founded ON CONTRACT or
on tort or wrong; as an action on A DEBT OR PROMISE, or an action for a trespass, assault
or defamatory words; OPPOSED TO REAL ACTIONS, OR SUCH AS CONCERN REAL
PROPERTY. (Webs1828)

PERSONAL IDENTITY - In metaphysics, SAMENESS OF BEING, OF WHICH

CONSCIOUSNESS IS THE EVIDENCE. (Webs1828)

PERSONAL VERB - In grammar, a verb conjugated in the THREE PERSONS; thus called IN
DISTINCTION FROM AN IMPERSONAL VERB, WHICH HAS THE THIRD PERSON
ONLY. (Webs1828)

—=—

For the purposes of our understanding herein, only this distinction between what is legally “real”
and what is “personal” need be comprehended. In other words, what is attached (legally real/
immovable) to the land (real estate) and what is not attached to the land (movable/personal). For
as we will soon discover, as the common citizenships of the United States with no domicile in any
of the private (foreign) States, we are all movables as well. We have no real estate, only publicly
registered personal estate, which means that everything we think we own actually belongs to the
legal person (admixed name) it is registered in. And if the reader hasnÕt Þgured it out by now,
movable things (including Þctional persons) are property of real things (private estates). Our public
persona (status) is not our own. We are only renters and tenants on another's real estate. But none

!385
of this is Real in Nature, the land and estates having no actual substance, existing only Þguratively
real and personal on paper (in legalese) as a lie, as lying in grant or deed. It’s all for the strawman,
persons built of paper with paper titles.

Even a public person conducts his affairs as legally “private” in many matters. However, ultimately,
a public person has no actual Natural privacy under God’s Law and Authority, only the legal
illusion thereof. For anything we say or do while acting in persona may be used against us in a court
of law, for it is not our person (self) we are existing in. Quite simply, we are not the creators of our
True Selves. And so he that is the creator of Þctional persons is the principal god to any man foolish
enough to act in the agency of that person in surety. There is no privacy in publicity.

To be clear:

To act (verb) personally is to act without false persona. To appear (noun) in person (personally) is to
act without agent (attorney).

To act in general is to act publicly, as without gens (without a private tribe/People, without the
bearing of private Arms/bloodline, and so within a general species or class as common goyim of a
nation). This is also called as oneÕs ethnicity, especially as to what is the ofÞcial national language.
Ethnicity is not based on blood or race, but on which nation one is birthed as live stock under.
Ethnicity is always Þction, idolatry, for ethnicity is a Ònational identityÓ and all the gods of the nations
are idols. The international Olympics, for instance, are based not on race but ethnicity, which is why
the teams of the United States are a representation of all races. But make no mistake, if all 50 States
of the Union sent their own private People individually, then Americas 50 teams would be strictly
made of legally declared “white persons” that are all kindred by blood.

To act special is to act without species (legally speaking, to act particularly or personally, not
generally).

To act as an animal (beast of burden) is to act without soul (without anima, without Self-
determination).

If we ask a syndicalist-titled professional his personal opinion he may tell us his own opinion
without consideration of the title his person operates as. So his personal opinion is unofÞcial, as
one being not by the virtue of his ofÞce and title. It is thus without person. This is personal or
private information, not publicly given on record. A doctor may offer his personal opinion that
certain strains and preparations of cannabis are proven without doubt to kill cancer, but his ofÞcial
title legally disallows his personal or private opinion from being stated in any ofÞcial (public)
capacity. For the doctor is not acting as his own True Self, instead respecting the person and title of
another, which requires adherence to the laws of that public persona and ßattering title under the
bond and surety of contracted trust (agency). And you wonder why I dis-trust the medical
profession?

Likewise, if I appear in court without an attorney (without representation) then I may be said on
record to have appeared in person, yet still only in and as the person of another. It is when we
agree to abandon our privacy and assume the form of another’s legally created person (status) that
this word personal becomes artful and adversarial to its True intent in Nature. While the private
man acts as and for only himself, the public person acts only as and for the artiÞcial self of another,
subject to the principal of man’s legal persona he personally appears as agent for. The private man
has no agency relationship to those public administrative judges and ofÞcers of public law, appear-
ing always as his Real Self without respect of legal persons. The public man cannot appear as his
Real Self, for his strawman’s name is public property and can only be represented while acting in
(as the) Þctional person or by an agent (attorney) for that person.

As is deÞned above, the term personal identity is only sameness, not mere similitude, and is only
expressed by consciousness, the self-evidence of Life and Being. This is a verbosity. But when

!386
personal identity is stated as a noun, that is, in legal name and title, then whatever is combined
with that persona belongs not to the man but to the person alone. What is personal to the man
acting in the public person of another is therefore always property of another. Slaves hold no
property, and a person is always a voluntary slave (subject) in agency (as master and servant). The
detached legal persona itself and all that is legally attached to it (including the man in pretended
surety) is considered as movable property of the state, as “personal property,” just like cattle.

And so the big difference here is simply this: a private man controls his own person while a public
man is controlled by another’s person. The law of the puppet controls and overtakes the law
(morals, religion) of the master. The private sovereignty makes the law of the land (virtual water)
concerning his public subjects upon the commercial sea.

Here, perhaps more than anytime else, the difference between the common (vulgar) and Latin
(legal/higher/Þgurative) meanings of words is made horriÞcally known. And this too is why the
Bible is adamant that no man should respect persons in any form whatsoever. For to act personally
(without person) in the very Nature of our own Creation and perfection of Origin and Design is the
only spiritual path. All art requires personhood, that vail of artiÞciality used to hide the True
Nature of all Existence. Overcoming our false persona, as the ceasing of respect and use of this
legally added id-entity, is the greatest of all lies (Self-deceit) to overcome. For the slave receives
beneÞts only if he is registered as and thus acts as a slave (a law-abiding citizen-ship), just as a free
man only receives beneÞts if he is registered in the status of the person of another as its voluntary
slave in bonded surety.

Private men (those without state-issued commercial identity of false legal persona) are immune
from these administrative laws of persons, for only the words of a man acting in a public persona
(in commerce) and by sig-nature of contract may be used against the man acting as such (as a
registered agent). Without a legal person (id-entity), there is nothing (no noun/no name existing as
legal property) to administrate. A private man is not attached to public law, for the private man has
no attachment to any public (commercial) persona unless he so chooses to contract such a legal dis-
ease and operate a vessel in some trust or agency of public, interstate commerce. And so politicians
and CEO’s of corporations don’t merely somehow magically evade the punishment (sanction) of
public law, they simply cease their temporary, legal existence in whatever public persona they
portray while acting as CEO. They remove their fake mask of public trust in corporate publicity
before any charges can be stuck to the surety (man) in that agency. And so yes, they literally, legally
get away with murder by causing upon themselves a voluntary civil death of the supposed ofÞce of
Þctional persona that committed the crimes. The Þctional persona, in other words, is thus
summarily executed. The name and title is put to civil death. But the man lives another day to
corrupt and plunder in whatever new name he privately in-trusts (in = en).

Remember, the words trust and agency are similar terms of art. When we enter into a trust relation-
ship, it is an agentic one, as truster (principal) and trustee (agent). And so the United States is a
corporate trustee, entrusted with the so-called public lands of the several (private) States (trusters).
This word truster is the same as a creditor. Of course the principal is always a creditor, the agent
always an entrusted debtor (surety for a monetary and/or performance debt).

INTRUST - verb transitive - [in and trust.] TO DELIVER IN TRUST; TO CONFIDE TO THE
CARE OF; TO COMMIT TO ANOTHER WITH CONFIDENCE IN HIS FIDELITY; as, to
intrust a servant with one's money or goods, or to intrust money or goods to a servant. WE
INTRUST AN AGENT OR FACTOR WITH COMMERCIAL BUSINESS, OR WE INTRUST
COMMERCIAL CONCERNS TO AN AGENT. We intrust our friends with secrets, or
intrust secrets to them. (Webs1828)

INTRUSTED - participle passive - DELIVERED IN TRUST; COMMITTED TO THE HANDS

OR CARE OF ANOTHER, IN CONFIDENCE that he will be FAITHFUL IN
DISCHARGING HIS DUTY. (Webs1828)

—=—

!387
Just whom or what did you intrust your child to when you certiÞed it to be de-livered (abandoned)
at birth?

In short, the power to create oneÕs own false persona within a trust (noun/name/title) and then
commercially operate that false, commercial name through a Þctional, legal entity called as a trust
(to be intrusted) is the power to commit virtually unlimited crime and forgive oneself with
impunity under the false (legal) law. This is why, for instance, the man using the name ÒBarack
ObamaÓ has so many former, traceable names (previous, false identities as trust accounts),
including but not limited to ÒBarry Soetoro.Ó Another word for this is sovereign immunity (lawless-
ness). We, however, out here in the general commonalty, are delivered (intrusted) at birth into a
singular persona (status) that is property of the state, not of our own choosing and without such
trust, meaning that we are not the creator of our own person, and so have no sovereign ability
while intrusted to the public jurisdiction and law.

—=—

“Sovereign immunity of state from liability exists when the state is

engaged in a governmental function.”
—Manion v. State, 303 Mich. 1, 5 N.W. 2d 527, 528. (Black4)

—=—

“In America, the powers of sovereignty are divided between THE

GOVERNMENT OF THE UNION, and those of THE STATES. EACH IS
SOVEREIGN WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBJECTS COMMITTED TO
IT… The sovereign or supreme power in every state RESIDES IN THE
PEOPLE. Blackstone supposes the jura summi imperii, or the right of
sovereignty, to RESIDE in those hands in which the exercise of THE
POWER OF MAKING LAWS IS PLACED. Our simple and more
reasonable idea is that the GOVERNMENT IS A MERE AGENCY
ESTABLISHED BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE EXERCISE OF THOSE
POWERS WHICH RESIDE IN THEM. The powers of government are
not, in strictness, granted, BUT DELEGATED powers. They are then
TRUST POWERS, and may be revoked. IT RESULTS THAT NO
PORTION OF SOVEREIGNTY RESIDES IN GOVERNMENT.”
ÑDeÞnition of ÔSovereigntyÕ (WCA1889)

—=—

Do not be confused by this work trickery, for without government there is no purpose for a People
(Law-makers) and thus no sovereignty. Government is the agent of the People of the private States
(principal). But no single man in Nature (under God) is sovereign, for sovereignty must be legally
claimed, granted, and enforced by government agents. ItÕs the old riddle of the chicken or the egg:
for how can any government have sovereign powers unless Þrst a People delegated their own
sovereign authority to that government in which they created? And yet no portion of sovereignty
resides actually in government. Form without substanceÉ

!388
The missing element is the contract; public citizen-ship (denizenship) as voluntary servitude,
subjection as an exchange for protection. Obviously he who subjects himself to something is not
sovereign over that thing. A public persona, a US citizen-ship (property), is not one of the People of
the several States. The People of the several States got together in compact, created (constituted) a
national government (Caesar’s district), and delegated part of their own sovereignty as a “People”
to that national government (a holding corporation for dummies). So obviously the citizen-ships
that are subject to the laws and therefore law-makers (sovereign “People”) of the nation are not a
part of the sovereignty themselves. The slaves are not the masters. The goyim are not the gods. To
the public citizenship, as each subject committed to the government, the delegated power of
sovereignty to that government by the sovereign People means that government is the sovereign of
its own creation, namely all legal persons, places, and things (nouns).

To be perfectly clear, a “People” can only be sovereign over those who have abandoned Jehovah,
the Source of Natural Law and what are recognized universally as unalienable rights (Natural
rights under God). In other words, only those acting in false persona (property) of another god
(government) are subject to this pirate cove of sovereign (lawless) “People” and their trickery.

SOVEREIGNLY - adverb - Supreme power; supremacy; the POSSESSION of power.

ABSOLUTE SOVEREIGNTY BELONGS TO GOD ONLY. (Webs1828)

SUPREMACY - noun - [See Supreme.] State of being supreme or in the highest STATION of
power; highest authority or power; as the supremacy of the king of Great Britain; or the
supremacy of parliament. The usurped power of the pope being destroyed, the CROWN was
restored to its supremacy over spiritual men and causes. Oath of supremacy in Great Britain,
an oath which acknowledges the supremacy of the king in spiritual affairs, and renounces
or abjures the PRETENDED supremacy of the pope. (Webs1828)

—=—

To possess power is not the same as having a station of power. To be supreme is not to be
sovereign. And this is why the name of God and christ is invoked when they name themselves as
God and christ’s replacement, the vicars, the anti-sovereigns.

The false promise of the sovereignty of man is a lie. It is accomplished only via corporate ofÞce (i.e.,
membership in a body corporate/People). It is the excuse of tyrants to rule by extortion and
legalized murder through organized crime (corporate government). This understanding that
JEHOVAH ALONE HAS ABSOLUTE SOVEREIGNTY necessarily deÞnes man (a Creation Of
and In Jehovah) as a Being without sovereignty and ultimately helpless under Nature’s Design
(God’s wrath). Thus sovereignty can never be Naturally occurring in any man. It must be
Þctionalized, legalized (made artiÞcially lawful), and enforced by military power over all other
men. Or… the general population can be tricked into believing in and thus respecting the legal
matrix code and the ßattering titles of false gods, all of which are self-evidently not Real and True,
not of Jehovah.

Never forget, God is the only True and absolute Sovereign Creator of man. But also never forget
that the state is the only sovereign over Þctionally created legal persons. To act in legal person is to
choose the People as one’s false god and lawmaker.

Now we can understand that the application of this and many other terms of art depends solely
upon the condition of man’s Self compared to his public or private “person” (status) or lack there-
of. Therefore we can also understand that our own use of any word is only considered according to
the status (persona) we are speaking it from, through our own position or dis-position in persona,
or rather what words that legal person is allowed to use as property of another. I cannot publicly
(legally) claim personal damages if I have no public or private person (reputation, status, or
character recognized by law), for I could not appear in any Þctional re-presentation to make such a
Þctional (legal) claim. I cannot invoke the public law of persons without being in agency to a public

!389
persona. I would be like a Þsh out of water, a Real man trying to appeal to an inanimate cartoon
character. My language would be foreign (private), and so too would my own person (True Self)
and private Law be. I would put up no show, and make no appearances as some thing I am not.

And so an absolute and unlimited state of forgiveness at all times is a necessary part of Being
Naturally Free under God. Only without (outside of) such True Love and forgiveness do the courts
and lawyersÕ guilds exist. Those devilÕs advocates must promote devilry to ensure the devilish
reactions of us all. They must cause us to abandon God, for their profession has no place within the
Reality of Nature or Its Law. They must steal us away to the legal Þction, the debtorÕs hell. You see,
to forgive is Truly Divine. And no legal judge of persons has such True Divinity, carrying instead
only a false lordship over Þctional matters, sitting proudly as the majesty of their own created hell.
And so, when we forgive without want or need, without permission or decision or legal aid of a
falsely titled magistrate and its devils (attorneys) in manÕs unspiritual legality, we take away the
power of these devilmasters in black robes by simply circumventing their ÒopinionsÓ about our
private actions. If we do not ever act in public, we cannot be so judged by public authorities, by
those who own and administer as property the artiÞcial public realm. Lawyers would be few and
far between if forgiveness was the First and Highest Law. And it makes one wonder what would
happen if in the middle of a court case the plaintiff simply stated that he Truly forgave the man
acting as surety for the person (defendant). The devilÕs horns would surely poke out from under
that black robe as order over chaos in Þction is attempted to be restored to that legal arena. How-
ever, since lawyers deal only in Þction and since the common man has turned his back on GodÕs
Law in lieu of his legal Þction self under the laws of mammon, we play in these attorneyÕs
amusement park all day long, in every day and every night of our false existence. We sue each other
(through attorneyÕs) for damages caused to Þctional things, money, and real estate that is not
actually our own, and we live by the fear of being sued if we break any of the strict, immoral or
amoral laws of the gods.

To further prove this point, we Þnd that the word forgiveness is a dirty word in law. That is, the
word forgive is not listed or deÞned in BlackÕs Law 4th Edition, and in William C. AndersonÕs 1889
Dictionary of Law the word forgive states: see condone, mercy, and pardon. There is no proÞt or
gain in forgiveness, and so forgiveness is simply not allowed except to forgive the crimes of the
legal gods in their own conspiracy (combination/confederation) of the legislature. Thus the newly
elected president pardons (legally forgives) the crimes of the last president in every new ad-
ministration. In other words, when it comes to the common personage, only the god (judge) of the
court can forgive, shedding his benevolence of mercy and pardon upon the poor sucker that prays
(pleads) for such forgiveness of legal error to the gods of legal things. Amazingly, words like love,
forgiveness, charity, and similarly ÒspiritualÓ and voluntary concepts are treated with much con-
tempt or as merely words of inducement to legally contract, yet more evidence that the spirit of
GodÕs Word (Son) kills the artiÞce. These terms of Nature are evil concepts in the land of the
artiÞce, mirror images of Truth without acknowledged substance. SimulacrumÉ They are our only
True solution, if we can only Þnd the path by Þnding our True SelvesÉ

But let us not pretend either that some actions of man can ever be forgiven. These must be dealt
with on an individual basis, without need of an entire legal structure where all public actions of
public persons must be heard by the constituted public authorities. Only private men may Truly
defend themselves within the protections of Law, even the Highest Law. Christ was not a paciÞst
by any means, for GodÕs Word instructs us to leave the cities, by picking up our stake (abandoning
our public ÒpersonÓ) and by physically and mentally walking away from those immoral structures
of church and state and never turning back. This is an act of negative aggression. This is not a state
of peace, but of quarantine, of self-banishment from evil, and of complete and utter contempt for
all legal Þction that gives power to ßattering titles as false creations of manÕs law and imagination.
And he who dares trespass on christÕs church (People) and Pure Nature beware, for no legal law
may protect any manÕs person from the wrath of GodÕs private People.

Banishment is the oldest punishment on the books, and is often Þguratively referred to as execution
or death even in the earliest translations of the ÔCode of Hammurabi,Õ and sometimes

!390
metaphorically as the beheading of man, due to the notion of being abolished or unrecognized as
part of a tribe or town in which the capita (heads without names) are counted in census. Only those
acting in the civil franchise of a Þctional dead persona are counted as property.

And what of the notion of self-governing religious men in free societies?

Was Friar Tuck a wimp? Or was his staff the deadliest in all the land; skilled so as to defeat even the
famed Robin Hood? After all, he had ale to protect! The religious man is not in any way the help-
less man. Quite the opposite! For while he may practice a sense of permanent paciÞsm in all
matters, his ultimate position must be one of defense of all that is Right, all that is Reality, all that is
of the defenseless Nature of God. In other words, the spiritual man and protector of God’s Realm
will not bargain in Þction nor accept lies. He will not negotiate or give away anything good for the
gain of anything, neither good nor evil. A Pure, Charitable man has no need of gain, and thus no
need to contract or to accept “necessary evils.” Evil is a term of art. The religious (spiritually
driven) man must fend for himself and his family at all times, without the false protectionism and
insurances of these municipal systems of mammon. The public dogs that we have all been
domesticated into as public citizen-ships cause us to have accepted a state of total dependence
upon our master (principal). And our master hires us to harm and kill unrepentantly in its name
and arms, for its own safety and security. The spiritually Free man of God fends not only for him-
self, but for the defenseless, and for that and those in between, which must be defended against
such false, legalized charities of the church and state.

And so I tell the reader of this work one thing for certain; that my own “monastery” of like-minded
men will be stocked with peaceable ninjas that will die to protect their own Nature of Pure Self as
well as that of their fellow sojourners, acting only as the army of Jehovah. The fool who travels
upon private land believing the public law protects his actions will soon realize his error and his
ridiculous disposition there, either in his banishment, in his pain, or in his death. This is the way of
the negative, Natural Law of God. To follow christ’s example is to protect christ’s example in every
way, to worship and cause to be sacred only the Word (Son) and nothing else. And the Word is
Creation. A Life Lived in self-evidence and self-Existence cannot be fulÞlled without this Purest
form and substance of Self-defense, the defense of the mind, body, and soul from artiÞce, keeping
the Purity of the True temple of God that is each unblemished man.

As for the notion of battle and war, men only do battle over Þctional things, defending Þctional
empires (places), and in protection of ßattering titles (persons) and wealth of estate (mammon). All
wars, in other words, are commercial, and thus are merely a sacriÞcial ceremony glorifying the
power and utter corruption of mammon. And so that the reader may again understand the Biblical
referential to God and war, all war is always offensive to God. And yet as a punishment for man’s
actions against God, his own actions in worship of the artiÞce cause this wrath of God. In other
words, a man of God never has reason to go to war, for a man of God respects none of the
commercial (monetary) reasons for war. And so to say that God does not punish the righteous is
actually to say that men acting righteously remain strictly and voluntarily Pure and Immune from
such commercial events such as war and birth (slavery). The punishment and wrath of God is only
the actions of man’s own unspiritual actions against each other in false title over self. God does not
want nor cause war, man does. And so the scriptural way of stating this fact is to call man’s own
actions as a punishment from God. This is to say that when man turns away from the Natural
Order and Highest Law of his Source, his chosen path will always lead him into corruption and
destruction by his own doing. This is called as the spiritual judgement and punishment of God. But
it can only ever be blamed on the nouns (names) of man’s re-creation, not the verb Jehovah. Only
men acting as gods can declare war. And only men acting in surety to those men acting as gods will
be forced to battle on behalf of their legal personÕs principal. Only respect of artiÞce causes war,
and only contempt of all artiÞce creates the harmony of man and Nature (Creation).

As for public persons called or drafted through selective service or other government contract as a
prescribed legal duty of citizenship, this personal duty, for instance, would be a debt and obligation
attached contractually to the person, and thus the man in false honor and surety of the contractual

!391
relationship under protection and thus subjection to his master’s interest must honor that debt and
that calling to arms while acting in persona. This is known as a personal “performance” debt, for
we act in the form required by law as debtors while our substance is cowed by the artiÞce.

—=—

“The horse is prepared against the day of battle: BUT SAFETY IS OF

THE LORD.”
—Proverbs 21:31, KJB

—=—

It appears that those meek who shall inherit the earth are those whom are at Peace with the earth,
and equally prepared to defend her with their own Life (Self) in Oneness with Her.

Let us Þnally be clear as to the difference between personal property and real property in the legal
language, remembering that under the legality of Þction, nothing is actually Real (of GodÕs Nature
of Creation). All words are conÞrmed and accepted lies in legalese. So this term of art real refers to
papered (titled) land (as real estate), as well as that property of the estate which is either movable or
immovable upon it. Public persons CANNOT HOLD LAND. Public persons are only ever mov-
able property not real, and thus always personal property. They cannot stand (have legal standing)
on their own land, only on the land of another land-lord (god). That which is already the property
of another cannot hold other property with impunity of perfect title, for someone must own the
original property. Public persons are allowed to own and use movable or personal property, such as
jewels and shiny or technological objects that keep us distracted and entertain our minds, but can
never be private land-holders. Public persons (all in attainder) have no lawfully considered blood,
and land only ever inherits to blood heirs. Property cannot hold property, and all United States
persons are property of the public. This is the major and most important difference between what is
legally considered as a private versus a public person, for without land no man can be free, as he
must always live (rent) and walk (trespass) on the land of another. Citizenship is therefore a
general license or “easement” for public persons to walk upon public places, but not necessarily
private ones. No slave (subject) ever holds the land he works and squats upon. The private owns
the public in all cases, and so a public person is property of the private men who created the
corporation nation (as father and principal of publicly created things). No man is property, only the
person (vessel) that man is in surety to via contract. A United States citizenship is always, with no
exceptions, a public persona. And the public (agency) exists only to serve the private (principal). In
other words, a public person has only one father (the state/district as creator of legal persons, places,
and things), which is the nation/district of Caesar (seizure), for man has abandoned the realm of
GodÕs Nature and Reality and thus cannot claim the Arms of blood-right of his Natural or Spiritual
Father, only his personÕs strawmanÕs artiÞcial creator.

And all the gods of the nations are idols…

If what you think you own as property is registered (taxed) in the legal name (person) of another,
then in Truth you own nothing at all. What you contemplate as personal property is actually under
the seizure of Caesar’s district (distress/distraint), or the allodium of the States (People-god). And
what is most ironic about this realization is that in Reality, that is in Nature (GodÕs Property of
Creation), man owns only damned things, for all the names of all things are indeed damned and
only Þctional, and only damned, dead persons may own that which is named. A legal person exists
only in a spiritually dead dam-nation. We are so utterly destroyed in our spirituality and harmony
with GodÕs Nature that we have allowed the entire world to be registered and owned by Þctional
names of corporations (artiÞcial persons) and legal Þctions called corporately as Ònatural persons.Ó
Man has abandoned all things to Þction and is thus entirely ruled by the names (nouns) of his own
imaginary artiÞce. Our conscious awareness has been redirected to the point that we collectively

!392
recognize only a simulation of Reality, the symbolism of God, and only the artful form of Nature, as
if we are living in a painting of Real Life or are trapped in its cold reßection. To call this as hell and
to call this lifestyle as utter satanism (adversarial to Nature) is the understatement of the age.

PERSONIFY - verb transitive - [Latin persona and facio.] TO GIVE ANIMATION TO

INANIMATE OBJECTS; TO ASCRIBE TO AN INANIMATE BEING the sentiments, actions
or language of a rational being or person, or TO REPRESENT AN INANIMATE BEING
WITH THE AFFECTIONS AND ACTIONS OF A PERSON. Thus we say, the plants thirst for
rain. The trees said to the Þg-tree, come thou, and reign over us. Judges 9:1. (Webs1828)

IMPERSONATE - verb transitive - TO PERSONIFY. (Webs1828)

IMPERSONALLY - adverb - In the manner of an impersonal verb (in the third person).
(Webs1828)

IMPERSONAL - adjective - [Latin impersonalis; in and personalis, from persona. See Person.] In
grammar, an impersonal verb is one which is NOT EMPLOYED WITH THE FIRST AND
SECOND PERSONS, I and thou or you, we and ye, for nominatives, and which has no
variation of ending to express them, but is USED ONLY WITH THE TERMINATION OF
THE THIRD PERSON SINGULAR, WITH IT FOR A NOMINATIVE IN ENGLISH, AND
WITHOUT A NOMINATIVE IN LATIN; as, it rains, it becomes us to be modest; Latin toedet;
libet; pugnatur. (Webs1828)

NOMINATIVE - adjective - Pertaining to THE NAME WHICH PRECEDES A VERB, or to the

Þrst case of NOUNS; as the nominative case or nominative word. (Webs1828)

PRECEDE - verb transitive - [Latin proecedo; proe, before, and cedo, to more.] 1. TO GO BEFORE
IN THE ORDER OF TIME. The corruption of morals precedes the ruin of a state. 2. TO GO
BEFORE IN RANK OR IMPORTANCE. 3. TO CAUSE SOMETHING TO BE BEFORE; to
make to take place in prior time. It is usual to precede hostilities by a public declaration.
[Unusual.] (Webs1828)

PRECEDING - Next before. (Black4)

PRECES - Latin. In Roman law. PRAYERS. One of the names of an application to the
emperor. (Black4)

PRECEDENT - An adjudged case or decision of a court of justice, considered as furnishing

an example or authority for an identical or similar case afterwards arising or a similar
question of law. It means that a principle of law actually presented to a court Of authority
for consideration and determination has, after due consideration, BEEN DECLARED TO
SERVE AS A RULE FOR FUTURE GUIDANCE IN THE SAME OR ANALOGOUS CASES,
but matters which merely lurk in the record and ARE NOT directly advanced or expressly
decided are not precedents. A draught of a conveyance, settlement, will, pleading, bill, or
other legal instrument, which is considered worthy to serve as a pattern for future instruments
of the same nature. (Black4)

—=—

To be clear, to personify anything is to act as or treat that thing in the third person, as impersonal,
or as not part of our actual Nature of Self. To personify is to recognize form only as a subjective re-
presentation of the Real, without consideration of actual substance or object. We speak of the
personiÞcation of God as being that of Jesus christ, for instance, or as Jesus acting in the third
person of Jehovah, or in the spirit of Jehovah. And so under God we either act as our Self
(personally) or we act impersonally by impersonating the status (person) of another, which is also
called legally (adversarially) as acting ÒpersonallyÓ or Òin person.Ó The term of Nature (of Self) is

!393
turned into a term of art (as a name of public personhood). And so here lies another example of
similitude but not sameness, of how language has defeated us utterly, tricking us into appearing as
that which we are not, even while believing in the legitimacy of such artiÞce of ofÞce.

So what about the Þrst and last names; the Òchristian nameÓ and the Òsurname?Ó

Here’s where it gets interesting…

The given, Þrst, christian, or fore-name is also referred to as the Òpersonal name.Ó This is a freely
given gift, bestowed only in Nature without permission, license, or registration. It requires
conscious thought and choice by the parents. Alone, it is also too ambiguous to be classiÞed as a
nomenclature (word-group) that describes any type of legal entity (e.g., a Þctional persona). Thus
the Þrst name is a creation and term of Nature (Origin).

The family, last, or sur-name is also referred to as the Ògentile name.Ó Another word for gentile is
common, or goyim, as a heathen worshiper of the false gods of the nations in which that admixed
Òfull nameÓ is registered. This is only the inherited name, assumed and contracted (like a dis-ease)
from the status of the parent. The parent need not consider or choose this last name (word), for it is
automatically passed to each new subject of the gods of the nations according to the status it re-
presents the parents in. But the last or surname alone is not considered as a personal name. Thus
the surname is a creation and term of law (Þction).

However, when the Þrst (personal/Self) name is placed together with the last (gentile/common/
goyim) name as one word-group that describes an incorporated ÒindividualÓ person as a Þction of
law, then the full name is also considered as the personal name of a legal entity, also called as a
Ònatural person.Ó But this word personal, here used in artiÞcial description of the full name in
Þction, is the legal version of the word, whereas the term personal as used for only the Þrst, God-
given gift-of-Nature name refers to the unblemished blood and spirit. In the full (admixed) name,
we act in the person (incorporation) of another, and thus we act personally in this legal sense. We
act artiÞcially as a person not our own, not as our actual Self. But with that Þrst, christian name
only, we operate personally as our own Self. In other words, the given (christian) name alone is not
a personiÞcation of self, it is the actual or Real Self. The full name, however, represents that same
man pretending to be as a Þctional character in an impersonal, legal name of the state, for to carry
the last name of another requires a contractual relationship of that dis-ease and burden with its
owner. And so the man must appear as the nomenclature (word-group) that makes up that in-
corporation of Þrst and last names, as the property of and under the law of another. It is not dis-
similar to the employer/employee relationship, the employee (agent) acting on behalf of his
employer (principal). The person is movable land, as chattel, and the principality that makes the
law of the land thus makes the law of the legal person, ordaining that law to be the highest law in
the Þctional ÒlandÓ (jurisdiction) of the territory of the nation.

To follow christ one must always walk as one’s True Self in Organic self-evidence and pre-tend to
be no other. To be corrupted by legal names and titles is to follow the satanic path (that which is
adversarial to Truth, to Nature, to ourselves, and generally to Jehovah). This is the story of christ;
the Word as the Law of God. The Bible is very clear on this matter; that is, if you are not reading it
in dog-Latin while acting in legal persona while trying to satisfy your own ego caused by such false
id-entities created by the artiÞce of church and state and while trying to protect your ÒestateÓ of
wealth and riches gained in legal persona under false titles completely against scriptural teachings.

And so the question that a man of God, a True follower of christ must ask him or her Self is simply
this: when I state the phrase ÒI amÉÓ what does the word ÒIÓ represent? Am I myself or am I a
Þctional legal entity created by something unnatural? Am I acting in Þrst person as my own Self or
impersonally in the third person of a stranger? If I claim to be the registered legal entity and
persona of Clint Richardson, then I am conÞrming my second self as a Þction, and all of my public
dis-course will be considered in that third person (vicariously) instead of as my own, just as the
man pretends to be pope and king through an ofÞce of the Crown corporation. This is the legal

!394
trap. For to claim legal (artiÞcial) protections under the third person requires belief (love) of that
Þctional persona that those insurable protections are attached to. And so we live constantly in this
legal id-entity of the third person, never as our own man. And we have been trained to recognize
each other only in third person (in legal name only) as well, so that nothing we do in life is based on
Reality or in spiritual, Charitable, Loving intent.

Stop here and think about how your admixed, full legal name is written and placed upon all legal
documents. For we must realize that language is a weapon, causing us to act not as our Selves but
in the Þrst, second, and even third person. Which name precedes the other in order? Is the name in
which your home is registered for instance written as Richardson, Clint, where the christian name
takes the secondary position? This is the Ònoun [name] that precedes the verb [state of Being],Ó the
nominative of the christian name as the gift and grace of Jehovah. This is the placing of the mark of
the time domain in front of the timeless spirit of God, contracting the disease of legalism upon the
Þctionally tainted soul. It is always the last name (highest in order and will) that is summoned to
court. It is always the surname that is insured. And all property is registered in that legal last name.
In the Þction, the christian (Þrst, origin) name is all but disregarded, used only as one of many
marks and signs to identify and make certiÞably unambiguous the man acting in that sin of law
and agency as surety, insuring the appearance of the user and beneÞciary of that surname when
summoned like a demon by its master (principal).

And yet, amazingly, the surname alone is useless and dead (unanimated) without the christian Þrst
name attached to it. In any contract, the devil (attorney) can only offer additions (ad-dictions) and
never anything of substance, never anything Real.

What is done in persona is the property of no man.

Most important to this notion is that oneÕs id-entity relies also upon what one claims as one's
creator or antecessor. What Naturally Created the man, and what legally created the person? Blood
or ink? Flesh or paper? Soul or person? God or government? OneÕs re-presented identity provides
for what law one adheres to, and the child follows the status (persona) of his father. The father of a
United States citizenship is only ever the state (Romanized district of Caesar). And so we see the
importance of the christian name as it stands alone, compared to that spiritual name being adjoined
to and incorporated with the legal state surname (as property) and therefore the stateÕs legal law.

—=—

“An addition [to a name] proves or shows minority or inferiority.”

—Additio probat minoritatem. (Black4)

—=—

The surname is an addition, which when invoked through our actions, our signature, and our use
of credit or of anotherÕs property proves legally that our God-given, christian name stands in
inferiority to that last (higher) legal (anti-God) name, and thus so does our Moral, Spiritual Law.

ADD - To unite; attach; annex; join. (Black4)

ADDITIONAL - This term embraces the idea of joining or uniting one thing to another, so as
thereby TO FORM ONE AGGREGATE. (Black4)

AGGREGATE - Entire number, sum, mass, or quantity of something; amount; complete

whole, and one provision UNDER WILL may be the aggregate if there are no more units to
fall into that class. COMPOSED OF SEVERAL; CONSISTING OF MANY PERSONS
UNITED TOGETHER; a combined whole. (Black4)

!395
 AGGREGATIO MENTIUM - THE MEETING OF MINDS. The moment when a contract is
complete. A supposed derivation of the word “AGREEMENT.” (Black4)

AGGREGATION - In law of patents, it means that the elements of a claimed

COMBINATION are incapable of co-operation to produce a unitary result, and in its true
sense does not need prior art patents to support it. It does not imply mechanical interaction of
parts, but only UNION OF ALL ELEMENTS OF INVENTION TO REALIZE SINGLE
PURPOSE. A combination which merely brings together two or more functions to be availed
of independently of each other does not represent "invention" but constitutes mere
“aggregation." The assembly of old elements in a device in which each performs the same
function in the same way as it did when used alone, without mutuality of action,
interaction, or co-operation, is mere "aggregation" NOT INVOLVING INVENTION. (Black4)

ADJOINING - The word in its etymological sense, means TOUCHING OR CONTIGUOUS,

as distinguished from lying near to or adjacent. (Black4)

ADDITION - Implies physical contact, SOMETHING ADDED TO ANOTHER. Structure

physically attached to or connected with building itself. Extension; INCREASE;
AUGMENTATION. THAT WHICH HAS BECOME UNITED WITH OR A PART OF…
(Black4)

ADDITION (TO) NAME - Whatever is ADDED TO A MAN'S NAME by way of TITLE OR

DESCRIPTION. In English law, there are four kinds of additions, -additions of estate, such as
yeoman, gentleman, esquire; additions of degree, or names of dignity, as knight, earl,
marquis, duke; additions of trade, mystery, or occupation, as scrivener, painter, mason,
carpenter; and additions of place of residence, as London. Chester, etc. THE ONLY
ADDITIONS RECOGNIZED IN AMERICAN LAW ARE THOSE OF MYSTERY AND
RESIDENCE. AT COMMON LAW THERE WAS NO NEED OF ADDITION IN ANY CASE;
it was required only by stat. 1 Hen. V. c. 5, in cases where process of outlawry lies. IN ALL
OTHER CASES IT IS ONLY A DESCRIPTION OF THE PERSON, AND COMMON
REPUTATION IS SUFFICIENT. (Black4)

ADDITIONAL BURDEN - See Eminent Domain. (Black4)

—=—

Let us stop here and consider just what the purpose of this naming process is. For to name any-
thing is to claim that thing, to force one’s will upon it. For what is more powerful and more
inßuential than a name? To bear one's name is to show who one's master is; God or mammon;
Nature or that which is adversarial to It. Without a name a man (or anything or anyplace else)
cannot be registered and taxed. And so we must understand this purpose of the name, for the name
is an act of war or Peace, hate or Love, commerce or Charity. What we allow to be added to the
christian name (GodÕs gift of grace) is what declares our intent. The legal name, for instance, is not
God-given. It is ofÞcially given, a title of ofÞce, class, rank, and style in the satanic (adverse) legal
matrix of Þction. To add to GodÕs Creation is to disrespect the very Nature of GodÕs Perfection of
Design. Names (nouns) are designed to make distinct that which is not, to id-entify the otherwise
ambiguous and unidentiÞable man by turning him or her into a recognizable, taxable commodity.
We can only be seen by the formal noun (judge/jurisdiction) as another noun-form (legal name),
never as the substantial verb of spiritual Existence and Life we actually are at all times.

Of course, even the word name must be deconstructed so as to understand its purpose.

LEGAL NAME - The name OFFICIALLY GIVEN and RECORDED ON ONE’S BIRTH
CERTIFICATE. A LEGALLY RECOGNIZED name. (Black2)

!396
 NAME - The designation of an INDIVIDUAL PERSON, or of a FIRM or CORPORATION.
A PERSON'S "NAME" CONSISTS OF ONE OR MORE CHRISTIAN OR GIVEN NAMES
AND ONE SURNAME OR FAMILY NAME. It is the DISTINCTIVE
CHARACTERIZATION IN WORDS BY WHICH ONE IS KNOWN AND
DISTINGUISHED FROM OTHERS, and description, or abbreviation, IS NOT THE
EQUIVALENT of a “name.” CUSTOM GIVES ONE HIS FATHER'S FAMILY NAME, and
such praenomina AS HIS PARENTS CHOOSE TO PUT BEFORE IT, but this is only general
rule, FROM WHICH INDIVIDUAL MAY DEPART, IF HE CHOOSE. As to the history of
Christian names and surnames and their use and relative importance in law, see In re Snook, 2
Hilt., N.Y., 566. (Snook case will be covered later.) (Black4)

NAME AND ARMS CLAUSE - The popular name in English law for the clause, sometimes
inserted in a will or settlement by which property is given to a PERSON, for the purpose of
IMPOSING on him the CONDITION that he shall ASSUME THE SURNAME AND ARMS
of the testator or SETTLOR, with a direction that, if he neglects to assume or discontinues the
use of them, THE ESTATE SHALL DEVOLVE ON THE NEXT PERSON IN REMAINDER,
and a provision for preserving contingent remainders. (Black4)

NAM - In old English law, A DISTRESS OR SEIZURE OF CHATTELS. As a Latin

conjunction, for; because. Often used by the old writers in introducing the quotation of a Latin
maxim. (Black4)

NAAM - Saxon. The ATTACHING or taking of MOVABLE goods and chattels, called "vif" or
"MORT" according as the chattels were LIVING OR DEAD. Termes de la Ley (terms of art).
(Black4)

NAMARE - L. Latin. In old records, TO TAKE, SEIZE OR DISTRAIN. (Black4)

NAMATIO - L. Latin. In old English and Scotch law, A DISTRAINING OR TAKING OF A

DISTRESS; AN IMPOUNDING. (Black4)

—=—

To be clear, the legal naming and addition (ad-diction) of this registered surname process is for one
and only one purpose. It is to distrain, distress, impound, and thus place man under legal law
(cause in-jury), government, and sanction by attaching his christian name with a state issued
(birthed) ÒlegalÓ surname that is registered and certiÞed as the creation event of a legal entity,
called commonly as a legal “person.” Amazingly, the word Caesar carries the meaning of seizure,
distress, and distraint as well. And these words all mean the same thing as the word district. Man,
through his name (person), is seized at birth and put into a legal, artiÞcial state of being (district of
Columbia). And so Caesar’s empire of Rome is not a geographical place as much as it is a legal
jurisdiction or district. More on this to come…

However, here we can uncover the strange mystery as to why, in the medical profession, a mother
may have what is called a “caesarian section” at the moment of Live birth because the baby is
unable or seized from having a Natural birth. The baby is born therefore under distress and
distraint. This is the origin of the word cæsarian from the Latin root Caesar. We cut open the belly to
literally create an artiÞcial matrix (womb) for an unnatural birth process. The legal record of birth
certiÞcation and the registration process of the district (Caesar) carries a similar notion, a Þctional
birth process of a Þctional person into a Þctional world within a prefab matrix of artiÞce and law.

The addition of surname is in legal fact a sign of de-livery, a mark of condem-nation, the chains of
personhood as a result of being doomed (prejudged) to a spiritually dead, legal existence. One of the
hardest Realities to face for this author was to accept that in the eyes of the wicked magistrate gods
of the nations, the common people are considered merely as goyim, as cattle (chattel) used in a
system of human capital management. The only difference between cattle and human capital

!397
slavery is that the cattle have no choice, whereas voluntary indenture and servitude is as old as
kings and governments. We choose our master just as we choose to honor our additional names
and titles given by that master (false god). And as we will uncover, this naming process changes
our status and legal consideration from having God-given, unalienable rights (blood-right) and
immunity to manÕs law over any and all legal Þctions being considered in the status of public
persons with no Natural rights reserved, which is the same as any domesticated animal. The sur-
name is the mark, and the mark signiÞes a beast (name/person) of burden, placing man into the
eminent domain of those who ordained the “land.”

NAMIUM - L. Latin. In old English law, a taking; A DISTRESS. Things, goods, or ANIMALS
TAKEN BY WAY OF DISTRESS. Simplex namium, A SIMPLE TAKING OR PLEDGE. (Black4)

NAMIUM VETITUM - An unjust taking of the cattle of another and DRIVING THEM TO
AN UNLAWFUL PLACE, PRETENDING DAMAGE DONE BY THEM. (Black4)

ADDUCE - To present, bring forward, offer, introduce. Used particularly with reference to
EVIDENCE. Broader in its signiÞcation than the word "offered."(Black4)

ADDENDUM - A thing that is added or to be added; a list or section consisting of ADDED

MATERIAL. (Black4)

ADDICERE - Latin. In the civil law, to adjudge or condemn; to assign, allot, or DELIVER; to
sell. In the Roman law, addico was one of the three words used to express the extent of the
civil jurisdiction of the praetors. (Black4)

ADDICTIO - In the Roman law, the giving up to a creditor of his debtor's PERSON by a
magistrate; also the transfer of the (deceased) debtor's goods to one who assumes his
liabilities. (Black4)

PRAETOR - Latin. In Roman law. A MUNICIPAL OFFICER of the city of Rome, being THE
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, and possessing an extensive equitable jurisdiction.
(Black4)

—=—

This Latin term namium vetitum is the perfect description of what happens in the registration of the
public birth, where our children are customarily driven into the vice grip of the federal jurisdiction
of the United States, literally an unlawful (de facto/illegitimate place), pretending that this burden
of new Life is damaging to the State (landed, private People) it occurred in. We are as the plebeian
birth of yet another “useless eater” with no blood inheritance; of fruitless seed.

Once this legal name and description of Þction is artiÞcially attached to any Life form, the origin
(God) of that Life and its Natural Law protections may be pretended to be bypassed and
disrespected, where only the law of the name (Þction) is utilized. Thus every man in the world may
be labeled as a “terrorist” and conquered or destroyed utterly, for the man is merely the unwitting,
enemy surety to the Þctional name or title placed upon him.

To understand further this mindset, we may simply view the military language surrounding the
countless sea Life killed pointlessly every year merely to test sonic weapons under water. Notice
below the coldness of terms, where not even a ßicker of free will or the Law of Nature are present
in this devil’s speak surrounding the legal “taking” of Real Life. And remember, eminent domain is
also known as the taking of property, referred to in the constitution as the “Takings Clause.”

TAKE Ð This is a technical expression which signiÞes TO BE ENTITLED TO; as, a devisee
will take under the will. To take also signiÞes TO SEIZE, as to take and carry away.
(Bouv1856)

!398
 TAKE - To lay hold of; to gain or receive into possession; TO SEIZE; to deprive one of the
use or possession of; to assume ownership. (Black4)

TAKING – Criminal torts. The act of laying hold upon an article, with or without removing
the same; a felonious taking is not sufÞcient without a carrying away, to constitute the crime of
larceny. (q. v.) AND WHEN THE TAKING HAS BEEN LEGAL, NO SUBSEQUENT ACT
WILL MAKE IT A CRIME. (Bouv1856)

TAKE = “Harass, hunt, capture, kill or collect, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture, kill or
collect.” (U.S. Department of Commerce, and, ÑNOAA (NMFS) as deÞned under the MMPA)

TAKE = “To harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to
attempt to engage in any such conduct.” (NOAA (NMFS) as deÞned under the ESA)

INCIDENTAL TAKING = “…unintentional, but NOT UNEXPECTED take.” (NOAA)

POTENTIAL BIOLOGICAL REMOVAL (PBR) LEVEL = DeÞned by the MMPA as the

maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from
a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum
sustainable population. (NOAA (NMFS) as deÞned under the MMPA)

—=—

In this disturbing letter from some of our more illustriously evil legislators written to NOAA and
dated June 19, 2009, including California’s Senator Feinstein and Congressman Waxman, the
following legal Þlth was transmitted about the intentional taking of mass quantities of sea Life.
And this just so the military can conduct drills and experimental weapons testing that is
completely unnecessary, and yet permissibly destructive to collateral sea Life. Here, the gods show
their True, psychopathic, anti-God colors:

“…In many regions, the Navy plans to increase the number of its exercises or expand the
areas in which they may occur, and virtually every coastal state will be affected. SOME
EXERCISES MAY OCCUR IN THE NATION’S MOST BIOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE
MARINE HABITATS, INCLUDING NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARIES AND
BREEDING HABITAT FOR THE ENDANGERED NORTH ATLANTIC RIGHT WHALE. In
all, the Navy anticipates more than 2.3 million TAKES (signiÞcant disruptions in marine
mammal foraging, breeding, and other essential behaviors) PER YEAR, OR 11.7 MILLION
TAKES OVER THE COURSE OF A FIVE-YEAR PERMIT…”

—=—

Though many activists have tried, all have been unsuccessful in their efforts to stop these horriÞc
tests. For those illiterate, US public persons (property) of government that are protesting have no
right to complain or to tort, for they are acting as property (persons) of the state under contract,
and the contract makes the law. They are subjects, not masters. They pray to the gods of govern-
ment to cease in their systematic destruction, but prayer holds no weight in that legal realm. To be
clear, what is being committed here is the worst kind of unlawful attack upon GodÕs Nature. But in
that clarity one must realize also the legal fact that nothing ÒillegalÓ is being done here. There is no
legal battle to be fought, for the government is sovereign in its permissive, anarchical self-licensure
to “take” the lives of any defenseless Þctions (names and titles) it claims to re-create and own the
letters patent upon. And according to US Code, that includes its own citizens, as that false law
declares man to be considered only as any other Òanimal.Ó It is at points like these where itÕs clear
that a vast expanse of moral voidness exists not only in government, where any crime against
Nature and man can be made legal through property and entitlement of legal personhood. But
more importantly, the same measures (valuation) may be taken upon the cowed masses of the
public citizenry, who will not act violently against these satanic forces even in so destructive of an

!399
act even when it is upon themselves. Once the legal hook is embedded in the minds of men, we
begin to believe that to use force against government agents would be considered an actual harm
under the Natural Law, as opposed to exactly what Jehovah’s sons are instructed to do, which is to
never respect the person and title of he who seeks to break the Highest Law. And so we fall for the
devilish trick of respecting the persons and ßattering titles of such agents as Òpolice,Ó Òmilitary,Ó
ÒscientistsÓ of warfare, and Òsenators.Ó We bow to the ÒpresidentÓ and turn our backs on our role
as the stewards and protectors of Nature. WeÕre confounded and confused by the word magic of
legal trickery, which prevent us from acting in the moral, spiritual capacity and Law we are born
into.

And so the nihilists are winning, for they have robbed the meaning of Life even from the most
passionately spiritual of us. We want to Þght, but we are paralyzed by the magic spells of our false
gods. We are allowing the dream of the nihilist to overtake the Reality of Nature. For we remain
silent, trapped behind our false personas (masks) of presumed consent.

So whatÕs the deal with these ÒMan and other animalÓ (MOOA) laws?

Alfred Adask makes no qualms about stating exactly what it is: spiritual warfare through words.

—=—

“But you’re not being trapped; you’re not being snared by guns and
clubs [e.g. a police state], YOU’RE BEING ENSNARED BY WORDS.”
—Alfred Adask

—=—

In his presentation on the usage by government scribes of this MOOA deÞlement and deÞnition in
US Code, Alfred Adask presents the following points.

Firstly, here are some examples of the MOOA declaration in the US Code, keeping in mind that the
ÒPure Food and Drug ActÓ of 1906 in Section 6 deÞnes the words ÒfoodÓ and ÒdrugsÓ to apply to
“man or other animals,” and precedes to deÞne man to be in fact ÒanimalÓ for the purposes of that
code:

—=—

(2)(b) Food - The term “food” means (1) articles used for food or drink FOR
MAN OR OTHER ANIMALS, (2) chewing gum, and (3) articles used for
components of any such article.

(2)(g)(1) - The term ÒdrugÓ means (A) articles recognized in the ofÞcial
United States Pharmacopoeia, ofÞcial Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the
United States, or ofÞcial National Formulary, or any supplement to any of
them; and (B) articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation,
treatment, or prevention of disease IN MAN OR OTHER ANIMALS; and
(C) articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function
of the body of MAN OR OTHER ANIMALS…
Ñ21 U.S. Code ¤ 321 - DeÞnitions; generally

Ñ15 U.S. Code ¤ 55 - Additional deÞnitions

—=—

!400
 —=—

(d) ANIMAL - The term "ANIMAL" means ALL VERTEBRATE AND

INVERTEBRATE SPECIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
MAN AND OTHER MAMMALS, birds, Þsh, and shellÞsh.
Ñ7 US Code ¤ 136 - DeÞnitions

—=—

These deÞnitions are clearly deÞning man as animal, as equal to Òother animals.Ó Not man, but
man-kind, as hu-man beings. AdamÉ In other words, we are considered as mere soulless beasts of
burden by these lawmakers of the nobility and majesty of the god corporation (We, the People).
This concept has been at the center of debate before even Plato, and is not far from the same
argument of how to treat a slaveÉ as man or animal?

Remember the legal takings clause above, that the government may legally take the lives of the Þsh
and mammals (animals) of the sea under its self-declared eminent domain, as well as the registered
property of men acting in agency to the legal name in public persona. Well, what is it that separates
the human animal from the seal, whale, dolphin, or crustacean? The answer to this question, in
manÕs written law, has no moral Source. The answer, my friends, is purely one of legal status
(person-hood) in Þction. It is them, the self-aggrandized nobility of blood, against us.

—=—

“The fact that the human being CAN HAVE THE REPRESENTATION
“I” RAISES HIM INFINITELY ABOVE ALL THE OTHER BEINGS ON
EARTH. BY THIS HE IS A PERSON… THAT IS, A BEING
ALTOGETHER DIFFERENT IN RANK AND DIGNITY FROM
THINGS, SUCH AS IRRATIONAL ANIMALS, WITH WHICH ONE
MAY DEAL AND DISPOSE AT ONE'S DISCRETION.”
ÑImmanuel Kant (between 1772-1789), Lectures on Anthropology, Akademie-Textausgabe, Berlin. Reprint Cambridge University (2012)

—=—

“OTHER ANIMALS, which, on account of THEIR INTERESTS

HAVING BEEN NEGLECTED by the insensibility of the ancient jurists,
STAND DEGRADED INTO THE CLASS OF THINGS... The day has
been, I grieve it to say in many places it is not yet past, in which the
greater part of the species, under the denomination of slaves, have been
treated... upon the same footing as... animals are still. The day may
come, when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights
which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of
tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of skin
is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress
to the caprice of a tormentor. It may come one day to be recognized, that

!401
the number of legs, the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os
sacrum, are reasons equally insufÞcient for abandoning a sensitive
being to the same fate. What else is it that should trace the insuperable
line? IS IT THE FACULTY OF REASON, OR PERHAPS, THE FACULTY
FOR DISCOURSE?...the question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they
talk? but, Can they suffer?”
—Bentham, J., 1781, ‘An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation,’ edited by J.H. Burns and H.L.A. Hart, London: Methuen, 1982.

—=—

This boils down not to personal belief or religion. This is legal hell, an open-air prison for debtors.
Your opinion on the matter, that is, while acting in the person (property) of them, has no authority
under the law. Your ability to choose is lost under the strict law of man’s designs. And your status
as common goyimÉ I mean, what can I say? If the legal gods reserve the right to re-deÞne the
person of man as an animal within their own invented jurisdictional, Þctional realm, then so too are
you considered as surety for that false persona, per your presumed voluntary under-standing and
consent of their law as strictly written. If you are in use pf the person, then you are considered an
animal. In other words, the cold, unspiritual religion of the church and state is that lower classes of
men that have the legal capacity (persona) to be governed by them as common citizen-ships have
the positive right to be treated like animals, live-stock, peopled chattel, not like men under the
Law of Nature. This is a process, scientiÞcally speaking, of de-humanization, of an unnatural re-
scheduling of the classes of all species into Þctional, legal entities.

Remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse, my brother. To know the law and to agree to be
bound by and under the law is the same thing in the eyes of the law. This is a well-respected
principle (maxim) of law among the gods, for without it the ßattering titles they bear would be for
nought. And so I tell you now, your status in legal (anti-God) public persona per the Code of the
United States district (seizure) is no different from your pet’s status under you.

Gee, I canÕt imagine why christ would instruct us to leave such a Þctional nation and its municipal
corporations (districts, counties, cities, etc.)?

One is delivered (abandoned) in felony at legal birth into the jurisdiction of these municipal
magistrates (pirates of the sea) operating in the ofÞce of administrators of federal agency. For our
own agentic parents in addictio gave voluntarily our vital statistics over to the state, which assumed
our goods and liabilities in persona and insurance by the issuing (birth) of a created and registered
(taxed) name of a legal entity (public person). With its protection, the child is expected to be in life-
long civil subjection. This all happened with the addition of the state surname to the christian given
name consented to and certiÞed by our unwitting, voluntarily ignorant parents through no actual
comprehension of their own, and then conÞrmed and ratiÞed by our own actions as we age and in
our non-avoidance of use of that legal name and its conÞrming and consenting signature. We were
reassigned into an aggregate corporation (district) induced by our full (adjoined) names, where the
stateÕs assigned and attached (legal) surname trumps over our God-given Þrst name. Fiction has
victory over Nature. And only by shedding this incorporation of personhood can the True Natural
Law of scripture trump the legal law, which only applies to Þctional persons, so that men may act
upon their conscious and moral (religious) belief (Love) according to their own moral and religious
tenets that are in accordance with God’s unwritten Law and done so in the unwritten, unregistered
name of christ (christian name only). Until this separation of the names occurs both mentally and in
proper legal formality, man is bound to the law of persons as surety to state property. And unless
he follows that Higher Law of God from then on, Living only in the example of christ, he will be
sucked right back in to the legal Þction. For no man is above the Law of his own Nature. This
would be an impossibility in Reality, for we can never actually escape our True Nature, only pre-
tend to be something we are not through manÕs inventions and artful designs of Þction.

!402
We must reclaim our own personal identity and thus our Real Self from this public Þction while
simultaneously killing the inner ego that justiÞes our own evil actions in artiÞce while acting the
part of a false id-entity. We must become purely private in our affairs, reclaiming True religious
Freedom under True Law by abandoning the false freedoms (franchises/rights) of the state that
legally bar our religious actions (Pure Charity) from our religious beliefs (Pure Love).

And so, strangely enough, we must be and appear as the same man, as our True Self, and never in a
representative simulation, never in the similitude of artiÞcial ÒnaturalÓ persons. We must deny all
titles, numbers, and other marks granted by the corporations (agencies) of the state. We must al-
ways be the same man we are, inside and out, whether expressed externally or internally. We must
Live always in the Spirit and never in the falsity of the legalized ßesh.

IDEM - Latin. The same. According to Lord Coke, "idem" has two signiÞcations, sc., idem
syllabis seu verbis, (the same in syllabus or WORDS,) and idem re et sensu, (the same in
SUBSTANCE and in SENSE.) In Old Practice. The said, or aforesaid; said, aforesaid.
Distinguished from ÒpraedictusÓ in old entries, though having the same general signiÞcation.
(Black4)

IDEM PER IDEM - The same for the same. An illustration of a kind that really adds no
additional element to the consideration of the question. (Black4)

IDEM SONANS - Sounding the same or alike; having the same sound. A term applied to
names which are substantially the same, though slightly VARIED IN THE SPELLING, as
"Lawrence" and "Lawrance," and the like. Two names are said to be "idem sonantes" if the
attentive ear Þnds difÞculty in distinguishing them when pronounced, or if common and long-
continued usage has by corruption or abbreviation made them identical in pronunciation. The
rule of "idem sonans" is that ABSOLUTE ACCURACY IN SPELLING NAMES IS NOT
REQUIRED IN A LEGAL DOCUMENT OR PROCEEDINGS EITHER CIVIL OR
CRIMINAL: that if the name, as spelled in the document, though different from the correct
spelling thereof, conveys to the ear, when pronounced according to the commonly accepted
methods, a sound practically identical with the correct name as commonly pronounced, the
name thus given is a sufÞcient identiÞcation of the individual referred to, AND NO
ADVANTAGE CAN BE TAKEN OF THE CLERICAL ERROR. But the doctrine of "idem
sonans" has been much enlarged by modern decisions, to conform to the growing rule that A
VARIANCE, TO BE MATERIAL, MUST BE SUCH AS HAS MISLED THE OPPOSITE
PARTY TO HIS PREJUDICE. (Black4)

IDENTITY - In the law of evidence. SAMENESS; the fact that a SUBJECT, PERSON, or
THING before a court is the same as it is REPRESENTED, CLAIMED, or CHARGED to be.
(Black4)

IDENTICAL - Exactly the same for all PRACTICAL purposes. (Black4)

PRACTICAL - A practical construction of a constitution or statute is ONE DETERMINED

NOT BY JUDICIAL DECISION, BUT PRACTICE SANCTIONED BY GENERAL
CONSENT. (Black4)

PRACTICE - Repeated or customary action; HABITUAL PERFORMANCE; a succession of

acts of similar kind; habit; custom; usage; APPLICATION OF SCIENCE TO THE WANTS
OF MEN; THE EXERCISE OF ANY PROFESSIONÉ Practice of a profession implies a
continuing occupation, and a practitioner of veterinary science is ONE WHO HABITUALLY
HELD HIMSELF OUT TO THE PUBLIC AS SUCH. (Black4)

PRACTITIONER - He who is ENGAGED in the EXERCISE OR EMPLOYMENT OF ANY

ART or profession. (Black4)

!403
 IDENTIFICATION - Proof of identity; the proving that a PERSON, SUBJECT, OR ARTICLE
before the court is the very same that he or it is ALLEGED, CHARGED, OR REPUTED to
be; as where a witness recognizes the prisoner at the bar as the same person whom he saw
committing the crime; or where handwriting, stolen goods, counterfeit coin, etc., are
recognized as the same which once passed under the observation of the person identifying
them. (Black4)

IDENTITATE NOMINIS - In English law. An ancient writ (now obsolete) which lay for one
taken and arrested in any PERSONAL ACTION, and committed to prison, BY MISTAKE
FOR ANOTHER MAN OF THE SAME NAME. (Black4)

—=—

“True identity is collected from a multitude of signs.”

—Identitas vera colligitur ex multitudine signorum. Bac. Maxim. (Black1)

—=—

We must not make excuses. There are no exceptions. Not habit nor custom nor tradition nor law
nor employment (job description) nor license nor judicial opinion is an excuse before God. To
attempt to bypass the legal system by using a misspelled name is shameful at best. The problem is
not the misspelled name, it is the fact that we have accepted and conformed to the name and the
law attached to its false persona as represented. There is only one solution, one way to win, and
that is the absolute end of all contractual relationships whatsoever with this legal Þction without
legal reward or compensation (remedy, reparation). For no one ever actually wins in court. Slaves
never win. We can have no contract, no personiÞcation (name/noun) of that which is adversarial
(satanic) to Nature. We must bring an end in the minds of men towards the respect of the
proprietary naming of men as animals (beasts). Again, this must be your choice, each and every
one, for the god of mammon has many empty and dead but shiny things to offer that cannot be
attained without a surnamed and numbered, unambiguous legal persona as the mark and signs of
an in-sured man acting in the agency of state property. To acquire legal property, one must become
legal property. To inherit the Earth as the meek, one must as well become its Creator’s property and
respect no other god. It is quite easy to be induced into mammon by legal means, and the righteous
path of christ only shows its Treasure to the faithful, to those who seek Its Ultimate Truth. The rich
man will only look upon the man of God (True follower of christ) in contempt, for his god is his
own wealth and riches and the nation that protects its false existence and vain valuation. His god is
his personated self, as the full legal name of the registered owner of the addicted wealth he
worships and cherishes over his own soul and Natural Freedom. For without his god’s (artful
creatorÕs) legal persona and surety (insurance), his wealth could not be proven to Þctionally exist.
And to possess such artiÞcial things, he must appear as and in the name of something he is not. For to
the gods, he is just an animal (movable property).

So what does it mean to appear in court in personam (legal identity) as opposed to doing so in rem? A
better question is to ask how do government and its agents appear against us?

IN PERSON - A party, plaintiff or defendant, who sues out a writ or other process, or
APPEARS to conduct his case in court HIMSELF, instead of through a solicitor or counsel,
is said TO ACT AND APPEAR IN PERSON. (Black4)

IN PERSONAM, IN REM - In the ROMAN LAW, FROM WHICH THEY ARE TAKEN, the
expressions "in rem" and "in personam" were ALWAYS OPPOSED TO ONE ANOTHER, an act
or proceeding in personam being one done or directed against or with reference to A
SPECIFIC PERSON, while an act or proceeding in rem was one done or directed with
reference to NO SPECIFIC PERSON, and consequently against or with reference TO ALL
WHOM IT MIGHT CONCERN, OR "ALL THE WORLD." The phrases were especially

!404
 applied to actions; an actio in personam being the remedy where a claim against a speciÞc
person AROSE OUT OF AN OBLIGATION, whether ex contractu or ex maleÞcio, while an actio
in rem was one brought FOR THE ASSERTION OF A RIGHT OF PROPERTY, EASEMENT,
STATUS, etc., AGAINST ONE WHO DENIED OR INFRINGED IT. From this use of the
terms, they have come to be applied to signify the antithesis of "AVAILABLE AGAINST A
PARTICULAR PERSON," and "AVAILABLE AGAINST THE WORLD AT LARGE.” Thus,
jura in personam are rights primarily available against speciÞc persons; jura in rem, rights only
available against the world at large. So a judgment or decree is said to be in rem WHEN IT
BINDS THIRD PERSONS. Such is the sentence of a court of ADMIRALTY on a question of
PRIZE, or a decree of nullity or dissolution of MARRIAGE, or a decree of a court in a
foreign country AS TO THE STATUS OF A PERSON DOMICILED THERE. Lastly, the
terms are sometimes used to signify that a judicial proceeding operates on A THING OR A
PERSON. Thus, it is said of the court of chancery that it acts in personam, and not in rem,
meaning that its decrees operate by COMPELLING DEFENDANTS TO DO WHAT THEY
ARE ORDERED TO DO, and not by producing the effect directly. Judgment in Personam. See
that title. (Black4)

IN INDIVIDUO - In the distinct, IDENTICAL, or INDIVIDUAL FORM, in specie. (Black4)

IN SPECIE - SpeciÞc; speciÞcally. Thus, to decree performance in specie is to decree speciÞc

PERFORMANCE. In kind; in the SAME or LIKE FORM. A THING IS SAID TO EXIST IN
SPECIE WHEN IT RETAINS ITS EXISTENCE AS A DISTINCT INDIVIDUAL OF A
PARTICULAR CLASS. (Black4)

IN RENDER - A thing is said to lie in render when it must be rendered or given by the
tenant; AS RENT. It is said to lie in prender when it consists IN THE RIGHT IN THE LORD
OR OTHER PERSON TO TAKE SOMETHING. See In Prender. (Black4)

IN RERUM NATURA - In the NATURE of things; in the realm of ACTUALITY; IN

EXISTENCE. In a dilatory plea, an allegation that the plaintiff is not in rerum natura is
equivalent to averring that THE PERSON NAMED IS FICTITIOUS. In civil law, this phrase
is applied to THINGS. It is a broader term than in rebus humanis: e. g. BEFORE
QUICKENING, AN INFANT IS IN RERUM NATURA, but not in rebus humanis; AFTER
QUICKENING, HE IS IN REBUS HUMANIS AS WELL AS IN RERUM NATURA. (Black4)

—=—

“The action in personam is that by which WE SUE HIM WHO IS

UNDER OBLIGATION TO US to do something or give something.”
—IN PERSONAM ACTIO EST, QUA CUM EO AGIMUS QUI OBLIGATUS EST NOBIS AD FACIENDUM ALIQUID VEL DANDUM. Dig. 44, 7, 25;
Bract. lOlb. (Black4)

—=—

Of course no obligation exists without contract (a performance debt). But our voluntary action in
persona, using the marks and signs and identity of another, carries with it the implied contract
(debt of performance) of being bound by both the law of that legal person (status) and the court
rulings (precedents) caused by so many false legal prayers before us. We must not mix up the
negative state of permanent duty under Natural Law and the positive obligation created by legal
contract and under person-hood. One is spiritual and unwritten, one is legal and stands as the strict
law of public persons. They are opposites, as good and evil. And only one requires we sign a legal
surname to the devil’s favorite tool (contract).

So which person are you acting within?

!405
Is your person harmonious with your own private Self, or is it a rented “third person” in agency
and under distraint and distress from Caesar’s district?

Are you acting in the Þrst or third person?

Do you even know the debtor’s hell you invoke with each use of that strawman id-entity and
signature?

Only a man with literate knowledge of these language arts can answer these questions honestly.
And unfortunately, that means that you must think like an attorney… like them. For in the false
truth of a surety relationship, you already are acting in attornment — another word for agency.

ATTORNMENT - noun - The act of a feudatory, vassal, OR TENANT, BY WHICH HE

CONSENTS, UPON THE ALIENATION OF AN ESTATE, to receive a new lord or superior,
and transfers to him his homage and service. (Webs1828)

ATTORN - verb intransitive - [Latin ad and torno.] In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer
homage and service from one lord to another. This is the act of feudatories, vassels or tenants,
upon the alienation of the estate. (Webs1828)

PROCURATOR - noun - The manager of another's affairs. [See Proctor.] (Webs1828)

PROCTOR - noun - [contracted from Latin procurator, from procuro; pro and curo.] 1. In a
general sense, ONE WHO IS EMPLOYED TO MANAGE THE AFFAIRS OF ANOTHER. 2.
Appropriately, a person employed to manage another's cause in a court of civil or
ecclesiastical law, as in the court of admiralty, or in a spiritual court. 3. The magistrate of a
university. - verb intransitive - To manage; a cant word. (Webs1828)

—=—

Let us be perfectly clear here so that we do not ever confuse the word person with anything True or
of Nature. While the Latin word homo is a grammatically gender masculine word and is referential
to both male and female, the Latin word persona is strictly gender feminine, which in grammatical
terms signiÞes that which is subjective to something else. Man is never property, only his person
(status). The most popular deÞnition of gender as used in language is that:

—=—

“Genders are CLASSES OF NOUNS REFLECTED IN THE

BEHAVIOUR OF ASSOCIATED WORDS.”
The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Oxford; Gender. Cambridge University Press, etc.

—=—

Can words have behavior? Are they Living Beings? No… The opposing word for homo (man, rerum
natura) then would be persona (character, rebus humanis). Man happens in Nature, as one is born as
man. But person is an acquired trait, a dis-ease, as one not acting as himself, and instead in the
character of something he is not. One is Truth, one is a lie (artiÞce).

PERSŌNA, AE, I, f - from per-sŏno, TO SOUND THROUGH, with the second syllable
lengthened. I. A MASK, especially that USED BY PLAYERS, which covered the whole head,
and was VARIED ACCORDING TO THE DIFFERENT CHARACTERS TO BE
REPRESENTED (syn. larva)… Heads with such masks were used as ornaments for water-
spouts, fountains, etc… a mask, a masked person… a personage, CHARACTER, PART,

!406
 REPRESENTED BY AN ACTOR: “parasiti persona” …Hence, B. Also, transf. beyond the
scenic language, in general, THE PART OR CHARACTER WHICH ANY ONE SUSTAINS
IN THE WORLD (CLASS.): (EGO)… imposed upon me… in his own name… Hence, 2. A
human being WHO PERFORMS ANY FUNCTION, plays any part, a person, personage…
TO PEOPLE OF A CERTAIN STANDING and of a certain age… to persons and things of less
importance… the second chief personage… 3. (β). So of persons, opposed to things and
actions… Law t. t., a being having legal rights and obligations (including the state, etc.;
NOT INCLUDING SLAVES… (δ). A human being in general, a person (post-Aug. and rare)
… 3. In the grammarians, A PERSON.

—A Latin Dictionary (Latin intentionally removed here). Founded on Andrews' edition of Freund's Latin dictionary. revised, enlarged, and in great part
rewritten by. Charlton T. Lewis, Ph.D. and. Charles Short, LL.D. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1879.

—=—

This notion of persona is the same as the oft seen Latin and old English diphthong ae (spelled Æ),
carrying the meaning of one, or one of the age of consent. The short æ was replaced by the English
letter a, and the long sounding ǣ was replaced by the English letter e. It is still used in certain
property names to represent the personage (mask) of something, like in the name Caesar (Cæsar).

We can take the modern word “equity” for instance, which in the Latin was ǣquitas (ǣ changed to e),
and learn much from its misuse and misapplication in the Roman law we still follow today.

ǢQUITAS - In the civil law, EQUITY, AS OPPOSED TO STRICTUM OR SUMMEM JUS

(STRICT LAW)… Referring to the use of this term, Prof. Gray says (Nature and Sources of the
Law 290): "Austin and Maine take aequitas as having an analogous meaning to equity; they
apply the term to those rules which the praetors (elected magistrates) introduced through
the Edict in modiÞcation of the jus civil (civil law), BUT IT SEEMS TO BE AN ERROR TO
SUPPOSE THAT AEQUITAS HAD THIS SENSE IN THE ROMAN LAW." He quotes Prof.
Clark (Jurisprudence 367) as doubting "whether aequitas is ever clearly used by the Roman
jurists to indicate simply a department of Law" and expresses the opinion that an examination
of the authorities more than justiÞes his doubt. AEQUITAS (EQUITY) IS OPPOSED TO
STRICTUM JUS (STRICT LAW) and varies in meaning between reasonable modiÞcation of
the letter and substantial justice. It is to be taken as A FRAME OF MIND in dealing with
legal questions and NOT AS A SOURCE OF LAW. See Ǣquum et Bonum. (Black4)

ǢQUUM ET BONUM - "The Roman conception involved in ‘aequum et bonum’ or ‘aequitas’ is

identical with what we mean by 'reasonable' or nearly so." "On the whole, the natural justice
or 'reason of the thing' which the common law recognizes and applies does not appear to
differ from the 'law of nature' which the Romans identiÞed with jus gentium, and the
medieval doctors of the civil and common law boldly adopted as BEING DIVINE LAW
REVEALED THROUGH MAN'S NATURAL REASON." …where jus naturale and aequum
et bonurn were taken to have the same meaning. (Black4)

—=—

Sounds great but for one major ßawÉ how do you possibly apply a negative, Natural Law concept
onto a Þctional, legal character controlled only by manÕs positive and strict amoral law?


Here we may understand that some of the Latin maxims of law must be continuously questioned
and further scrutinized in their perspective, for the idea of Perfect Equity has nothing to do with
Þctional persons, as equity is a state of harmony with the Natural Law, where no persons (classes)
and no actors Exist therein. Yet in the following principle we can see this sort of false sense of legal
equity under the strict (Roman) law being applied. This is, in other words, man’s recreation of
equity to Þt into legal form under that which equity is actually opposed to, which is the strictum jus
or strict law.

!407
 —=—

“Equity acts upon the PERSON.”

—Ǣquitas agit in personam. 4 Bouv. Inst. n. 3733. (Black4)

—=—

This is legalese. In other words, the principal may only operate on legal (Þctional) persons, not
men. Agents may Þnd equity only in other agents of the positive (contractual) law. Negative Law is
unenforceable, unwritten. Thus maxim, therefore, only applies to false, legal equity, which in and
of itself is a misnomer. For it may only be forced upon other Þctions of law, namely persons (the
proprietary legal status granted in legal society to men by legal gods).

For clarity, legal equity between persons goes like this. Every right that is granted by the state to
one of its persons (property) necessarily exists only because some obligation also exists as its
opposite reaction. If you claim a legal right, or rather, as agent claim a right for your assigned
personhood, then you are actually invoking a contractual obligation upon some other legal person.
Unlike under the Natural Law where such rights are negative, and thus such Natural Equity re-
quires the non-action or nonintervention of another man as his voluntary duty, legal equity is
always a positive law right, which requires another person to positively fulÞll some action or
obligation under the implied contract of citizenship. This incredibly important difference is the
epitome of what the Natural Law is. For christ acted always in the negative duty under GodÕs Law
of Nature, invoking only the Natural Reason and duty of all men to each other, while never par-
taking of the false, positive power to control any man through his false persona (legal name) or
ßattering title. In other words, wherever christ would walk, his path never strayed from the land
and his feet were never upon the water. He could not be trapped by words, for his Word was of
God, his authority of Law always higher than that of his adversaries. And without contract, with-
out words, the devils (attorneys) have no power over any man. They must seduce and induce all
men into contracting under a different law.

Why was an involuntary slave not treated as legally equal to other men? Because that man was
afforded no legal persona (status) created by the masters (gods) of that state! In other words, no
ÒslavesÓ (or any other status or lack thereof) can be justiÞed to exist by any Law in Nature. Man
must create a Þctional realm to rule over in order to escape the Law of Nature and the self-
Existence of all within, and he must keep his victims (sureties and slaves) ignorant not only to their
own power of Self, but of the words that describe and deÞne their fall from Nature (Source). To
justify oneÕs ownership of another man as property, one man must Þrst be pretended to hold a
legally created character, a false persona and ßattery of title that is higher than the other. Thus, he
with a Þctional class and thus status (persona) in a society following the strict legal law alone may
hold and harm those who have been granted, stripped of, or required to have no recognized
persona (status/class). This monopolization of positive law equity Þts not at all with the christ
model of True (negatively given) Equity, Love, and Charity to all men.

Further exploration into these maxims allows us a clearer understanding, and takes us again to the
void Existing between strict, amoral, written law of men and the moral, unwritten Law of Nature.

—=—

“Equity is a certain PERFECT REASON, WHICH INTERPRETS AND

AMENDS THE WRITTEN LAW, COMPREHENDED IN NO WRITING,
but consisting in right reason alone.”
—Aequitas est perfecta quedam ratio quad jus scriptum interpretatur et emendat; nulla scriptura comprehensa, sed solum in vera ratione consistens. Co.Litt. 24b.
(Black4)

—=—

!408
 —=—

“Equity is the correction of that wherein the law, BY REASON OF ITS

GENERALITY, IS DEFICIENT.”
ÑAequitas est correctio legis generaliter latae, qua parte deÞcit. Plowd. 375. (Black4)

—=—

“Equity is A CERTAIN CORRECTION APPLIED TO LAW, because on

account of its general comprehensiveness, WITHOUT AN EXCEPTION,
SOMETHING IS ABSENT FROM IT.”
ÑAequitas est correctio quaedam legi adhibita, quia ab ea abest aliquid propter generalem sine exceptione comprehensionem. Plowd. 467. (Black4)

—=—

“EQUITY DOES NOT MAKE LAW, but assists law.”

ÑAequitas non facit jus, sed juri auxiliatur. Lofft, 379. (Black4)

—=—

“EQUITY NEVER COUNTERACTS THE LAWS.”

ÑAequitas nunquam contravenit legis. 5 Barb.N.Y. 277, 282. (Black4)

—=—

Again, we can do the math: if equity never counteracts the legal (written) law of man, and if under
the unwritten Law of God equitableness is to be in harmony with the Natural Law, then the legal
law is that which is opposed to the Law of Nature, to God, and to True equity. It is part of the un-
enforceable moral Þber that keeps the law in check, and it can only be manifested by men, not by
the written words of law. Law is nothing without an agent to act its words out in practice, and True
equity must be the foundation of every man’s Highest Law, lest the legal simulation conquer his
spirit. The foundation must be stronger than that which it bears as its burden and opposition.

This is not at all a dissimilar concept as is expressed in the New Testament (the New Law). For the
negative, unwritten Law of Nature fulÞlls the positive, written law of man. In other words, the
Word of God can never be perfect through
though just
justthe
thewords
wordsofofman,
man,and
andneither
neithermay
maythis
thisunwritten,
unwritten,
Natural equity (Reason) be perfect in the legal (anti-God) systems of manÕs Þctional law. The
teaching
teachingsofofchrist
christ(i.e.,
(i.e.,True
Truechristianity)
christianity)are
areaafulÞllment
fulÞllmentofofthe
theMosaic
MosaicororOld
Oldwritten
writtenLaw.
Law.Of
Of
course, what is said here to be “right reason” can only be had when the mind is not clouded by the
Þctions and imaginations of men. And so again we are faced with a conundrumÉ how can right or
True reason of Nature’s Law be applied to that which is not of Nature? How can that which is
opposed to right reason subsist at the same time with what is of right reason? In other words, how
can that which is satanic exist in God’s Realm? And the answer of course is that it simply cannot. It
must be forced. Laws and false personas and titles must be created to elevate certain men above
others, and these statuses must be enforced upon the rest through militarized governments. This is
called legal equity; yet another reason to never trust the simulation over the Real, the written over
the unwritten.

!409
 —=—

“Equity is as it were EQUALITY;


equity is a SPECIES of equality or EQUALIZATION.”
—Aequitas est quasi Equalitas. Co. Litt. 24. (Black4)

—=—

“Abandonment (is) THE RELINQUISHMENT OF A RIGHT; THE

GIVING UP OF SOMETHING TO WHICH WE ARE ENTITLED. Legal
rights when once vested must be divested according to law, BUT
EQUITABLE RIGHTS MAY BE ABANDONED.”
ÑBouvierÕs, A Dictionary of Law, 1843, from deÞnition of ÔabandonmentÕ

—=—

To be clear, that which is unenforceable, one’s God-given, unalienable, or Natural rights may be
abandoned. How else can Þction rule over what is of Nature than manÕs abandonment of his God
(Jehovah), his Source of Life and negative right? Thus, in the constitutions of the several States and
of the United States, these rights are instead listed as Òinalienable.Ó The preÞx of ÒinÓ causes a
change in meaning, which according to the courts translates to “sellable, able to be sold.” We sell
our soul, that is, our connection and lawful protection to God’s Nature and Highest Law for an
artiÞcial status (person) and ranking in Þctional society, all for a few measly beneÞts and per-
missions not found in Nature (under God). We sell our ability to claim negative rights for the ad-
diction of positive rights in persona. Ironically, once a legal (positive) right is attached, it is like a
disease, a wart that cannot be shaken without permission of divestiture. More on this laterÉ For
now, remember that citizenship is an act of divestiture, and this divesting of power is called as
Òequality,Ó as the forcing of Òequal rights,Ó which we can also remember is deÞned in Title 42 of US
Code as the right for our person (strawman) to be put in pain, punished, licensed, taxed, and
extorted (exacted) from. It is not so much that the man has lost his negative right to not be harmed
under this Code, it is that he is voluntarily using the person (property) of the state, which insists
upon that person having a form of legal equity (equal rights) to all other persons of the same status.
The implied contract, the incorporation of man and persona, is what conquers (purchases) man’s
soul and causes the man to follow the law of the person (strawman), not of God. Thus his God-
given liberty and freedom, along with his negative right not to be harmed, is put on lien or
alienated.

DEVEST - To deprive; to take away; to withdraw. Usually spoken of AN AUTHORITY,

POWER, PROPERTY, OR TITLE; as the estate is devested. Devest is opposite to invest. As to
invest signiÞes to deliver the possession of anything to another, so to devest signiÞes to take
it awayÉ It is sometimes written "divest" but "devest" has support of the best authority.
(Black4)

ALIEN or ALIENE - verb - To transfer or make over to another; TO CONVEY OR

TRANSFER THE PROPERTY OF A THING FROM ONE PERSON TO ANOTHER; TO
ALIENATE. Usually applied to the transfer of lands and tenements. (Black4)

LIEN - A right to keep possession of property belonging to another person UNTIL A DEBT
OWED BY THAT PERSON IS DISCHARGED. (Oxford Dictionary)

ESTRANGED - pp - Withdrawn; withheld; ALIENATED. (Webs1828)

!410
 ESTRANGE - verb transitive - [French etranger. See strange.] 1. To keep at a distance; to with-
draw; to cease to frequent and be familiar with… 2. TO ALIENATE; TO DIVERT FROM ITS
ORIGINAL USE OR POSSESSOR; TO APPLY TO A PURPOSE FOREIGN FROM ITS
ORIGINAL OR CUSTOMARY ONE… (Webs1828)

—=—

“Although alienation be prohibited, YET, BY THE CONSENT OF ALL

IN WHOSE FAVOR IT IS PROHIBITED, IT MAY TAKE PLACE; FOR
IT IS IN THE POWER OF ANY MAN TO RENOUNCE A LAW MADE
IN HIS OWN FAVOR.”
—ALIENATIO LICET PROHIBEATUR, CONSENSU TAMEN OMNIUM, IN QUORUM FAVOREM PROHIBITA EST, POTEST FIERI, ET QUILIBET
POTEST RENUNCIARE JURI PRO SE INTRODUCTO. Co. Litt. 98. (Black4)

—=—

Remember this well, that a law made in any manÕs favor (support, beneÞt, privilege) can be
renounced by that man. But remember also that this includes oneÕs God-given Natural Rights, for it
is only the Living man that may renounce such artful laws, not the proprietary legal status in
persona so bound to them. We abandon God and NatureÕs Law to obtain the beneÞt of personhood
(legal, anti-God status) in the Þction.

RENOUNCE - To make an afÞrmative declaration of abandonment. To reject; cast off;

repudiate; disclaim; forsake; abandon; DIVEST ONE'S SELF OF A RIGHT, POWER, OR
PRIVILEGE. Usually it implies an afÞrmative act of disclaimer or disavowal. (Black4)

FAVOR - noun - An act of kindness or generosity, as distinguished from one that is inspired
by regard for justice, duty, or right. Bias; partiality; lenity; PREJUDICE. See Challenge. - verb
- To regard with favor; to aid or to have the disposition to aid; TO SHOW PARTIALITY OR
UNFAIR BIAS TOWARDS; —practically synonymous with “support.” (Black4)

SUPPORT - verb - Furnishing funds or means for maintenance; to maintain; to provide for;
to enable to continue; TO CARRY ON. To provide a means of livelihood. To vindicate, to
maintain, to defend, to uphold with aid or countenance. To support a rule or order is to argue
in answer to the arguments of the party who has shown cause against a rule or order nisi. -
noun - That which furnishes a livelihood; a source or means of living; subsistence,
sustenance, or living. In a broad sense the term includes all such means of living as would
enable one to live in the degree of comfort suitable and becoming to his station of life. For
"Family," see that title. It Is said to include anything requisite to housing, feeding, clothing,
health, proper recreation, vacation, traveling expense, or other proper cognate purposes…
and proper care, nursing, and medical attendance in sickness, and suitable burial aattdeath.
death.
Support also signiÞes the right to have one's ground supported so that it will not cave in, when
an adjoining owner makes an excavation. This support is of two kinds, lateral and subjacent.
Lateral support is the right of land to be supported by the land which lies next to it. Subjacent
support is the right of land to be supported by the land which lies under it. (Black4)

—=—

If unclear, this applies to the entirety of Title 42 of US Code, for instance, including Social Security
beneÞts and the new Health Care laws, commonly attributed as Obamacare.

Now ask yourself how many laws of the United States Code are able to be renounced by any man?
The answer is zero. None at allÉ Remember, itÕs all about perspective, and all laws of the United
States deal only with persons (property) of the United States, not men. Men of God may renounce,
persons of the state are announced.

!411
 ANNOUNCED - participle passive - PROCLAIMED; FIRST PUBLISHED. (Webs1828)

ANNOUNCE - verb transitive - announs’. [Latin annuncio, to deliver a message, of ad and

nuncio, to tell from nuncius, a messenger.] 1. TO PUBLISH; to proclaim; to give notice, or Þrst
notice; as, THE BIRTH of Christ was announced by an angel. 2. TO PRONOUNCE; TO
DECLARE BY JUDICIAL SENTENCE. (Webs1828)

—=—

And so to be clear, this means that no law in the United States has ever been made to the favor of
any common man (goyim). All laws of the US Code deal in Þction, simply because all laws of the
United States exist and have authority only within the Þctional jurisdiction of the United States and
under contract, which in Nature does not actually Exist. No man is ever actually in the United
States, only his pre-tended, judicial sentence of public or private legal status (his strawman) exists
and subsists there. Remember, there is no air, no food or water, and no actual land in any Þction of
law. Districts (nations) are like portals to another dimension, or to hell if you will, where men are
controlled by the demons (persons) they have become aliened to.

To be absolutely clear, citizenship (personhood) is a voluntary alienation upon any consenting man.
And so it is that the status itself, the legal person (noun), the strawman itself must be re-nounced
(returned or rendered back to Caesar’s district). To be Truly Free under God and the Law of God’s
Nature, one cannot pick and choose, but must give up all ÒsignsÓ of legal id-entity. For all legal
laws are made exclusively for legal persons, the artiÞcial status legally attached to men but never
any actual man. No man need renounce a law if he has no persona (legal capacity/status) for that
law to apply to. The laws of Þction cannot be attached to any man without such a voluntarily
accepted Þctional persona. The ability and right state of mind (in compos mentis) of any man to
renounce personhood at any time (choice) is the obverse sign that one has chosen to accept the law
as written. Choice not exercised is a form of silent, tacit consent. Choice manifested through actions
under the law and in person is an expression of that consent. Man alone, not man acting in legal
persona, may renounce a law made in his own favor. Fictional persons have no such choice, any
more than a puppet has a choice whether or not to be controlled by its puppeteer (creator/master).
The person is property of the lawmaker, not the man enjoying the favor of that law through
personhood (subjection).

In Truth, legalized (forced and sanctioned) equity is the wholly inadequate, and I dare say is even
purposefully the opposing application of Natural equality. In legal parlance, the word equity is
used to describe that which is not equitable at all, which is forced equality among legal persons
(property), not men. But these are not the same concepts under NatureÕs Law. For when something
is artfully equalized, it must therefore be a property. To take away (suspend) all Natural rights and
replace them with false ones is to make all persons equal. To force equality by legally enforced law
is not equitable in any way. Those who trust the word without examining its use will become a
victim of that word and its legal use, for legal equity (equality) supports and thrives only in
ignorance. Slaves are equalized, as are Þctional persons and their statistics. But no man is ever
Truly equal with any other, for our private distinctions, no matter how obvious or imperceptible
they are, make up the beautiful and wonderful Design of Nature. Similitude is not sameness. Yet
these magistrate gods seek to recreate man in persona (in their own image), so that all men when
bound (by their Þctional status) are Òcreated equalÓ under the artiÞcial law. Thus all men may be
made to act and perform equally (in legal, artiÞcially induced equity) in commerce without spirit,
living as the spiritually dead in their civil (Þctional) lives. In fact, nothing is Truly equal in Nature’s
Design. Thus equitableness as harmony with the Law and Laws of Nature is necessarily a spiritual
aspect of manÕs negative discourse with each other under the True and spiritual Freedom of God. It
cannot be pretended within the positively written strict law, though we certainly try to force and
sanction it legally and without clear reasoning. But True equity under God is, in the end, a Purely
negative, moral issue. No mask can substitute its spiritually driven essence.

!412
 —=—

“Virtue has a veil, VICE A MASK.”

–Victor Hugo

—=—

“The question to ask about the writer isn’t ‘Why does he behave so
badly?’ but ‘What does he gain by wearing this mask?’”
–Philip Roth

—=—

In short, equity never favors the general mask of we, the debtors (citizen-ships). Once man is
bound in agency to a performance debt (contract/citizenship), he is disallowed to act in True
Equitableness due to his legal (anti-God/without Natural Law) obligations to his master/principal.

—=—

“Equity favors wives and children, CREDITORS MOST OF ALL.” 




—Aequitas uxoribus, liberis, creditoribus maxime favet. (Black4)

—=—

“Equity assists ignorance, but not carelessness.”

—Aequitas ignorantiae opitulatur, oscitantise non item. (Black4)

—=—

Remember, purposeful ignorance is merely carelessness in disguise, and ignorance of the law is no
excuse for the careless. For a better understanding of this notion of equity in positive law, let us
examine the Latin root of the concept of money.

ÆS - Latin. In the Roman law, MONEY, (literally, brass;) metallic money in general,
including gold. (Black4)

ÆS ALIENUM - A civil law term signifying A DEBT. Literally translated, THE MONEY OF
ANOTHER; the civil law CONSIDERED BORROWED MONEY AS THE PROPERTY OF
ANOTHER, as distinguished from aes suum, one's own money. (Black4)

ÆS SUUM - One’s own money. In the Roman law, DEBT; A DEBT; THAT WHICH OTHERS
OWE TO US, (quod alii nobis debent). (Black4)

ÆSTHETIC - RELATING to that which is beautiful or in good taste. Pertaining to the

beautiful. (Black4)

ÆSTIMATIO CAPITIS - Latin. The value of a head. In Saxon law, THE ESTIMATION OR
VALUATION OF THE HEAD: THE PRICE OR VALUE OF A MAN. THE PRICE TO BE
PAID FOR TAKING THE LIFE OF A HUMAN BEING. By the laws of Athelstan, THE LIFE
OF EVERY MAN NOT EXCEPTING THAT OF THE KING HIMSELF, WAS ESTIMATED
AT A CERTAIN PRICE, which was called the WERE, or aestimatio capitis. (Black4)

—=—

!413
It is no surprise that the word for money (ÆS) is used in the word that signiÞes the monetary
estimation in mammon for the head of each man (ÆSTIMATIO CAPITIS). For this merely signiÞes
the sin of placing a synthetic aesthetic (false value) upon all things that money can buy. However, it
still may be a surprise to learn that the concept of possessing “one’s own money” is merely the
holding of a debt (anotherÕs credit). In other words, since our Þat paper currency is not exchange-
able for any æs (metals as collateral) and has nothing of actual exchangeable substance backing it,
each ÒÞatÓ dollar in circulation is nothing more or less than an IOU (I owe you). The dollar is in this
way a simulacra Ñ a copy without an original. The valuation of that dollar or equivalent construct,
credit, or other simulation thereof, in other words, exists only in the mind of he who will accept that
dollar as payment for a debt, which in fact is a consensual agreement to accept debt (dollars) as a
payment (credit). So if I give you a banana, and you give me a US dollar, you have given me a
burden of debt that I must exchange with another imbecile who has been tricked into accepting a
public debt “note” instead of payment in its actual value (æs) of specie (coin/metal, etc) or some
other thing of intrinsic, useful value. Notice too that interest is never charged on a credit, only a
debt.

And so again, to hold ÒoneÕs own moneyÓ in the legal sense is to hold a certiÞed debt, an IOU. Yet,
to hold the borrowed money of another is also to hold a debt. But how can this be? Simply stated, a
citizenship operating publicly is deÞned as and may only ever be a debtor, never a creditor. And
just like in the game of musical chairs, the last person holding that debt note (promise to pay) will
lose the monopoly game, for no other players will accept it at its face value (æs) in mammon. He
who holds money (Þction) when it is devalued in the minds of other men, holds nothing at all. He
may burn it to stay warm or use it as wallpaper, but he may not use another man by convincing
him that his IOU is worth anything but the paper it is printed upon. Though it is difÞcult to con-
sider, each time we use a dollar to pay for something, we are in fact participating in usury. For the
value of that dollar decreases daily due to the accumulating unpaid interest and seigniorage
charged upon its public use (debt) by the central bank of the nation (corporation) it is the property
of.

This is the game we play. And with each use of anotherÕs money, US currency being property of the
United States Treasury, we pay taxes, tributes, fees, and other extortions for the use of what is never
actually our own. And you wonder why the New Law is so against mammon (valuation) and its
favorite tools of money and usury?

As one last note on this money issue, notice that the Latin spelling for the English dog-Latin word
aesthetic hasnÕt even been changed. We Þnd of course the Latin word æs used as the contraction for
what is a proposed value, so that we Þnd this word aesthetic to mean hypothetical value in money.
This value is also called as ones Òposition.Ó

AESTHETIC - adjective - 1. a: Of, relating to, or dealing with aesthetics or THE BEAUTIFUL
<aesthetic theories> b: ARTISTIC <a work of aesthetic value> c: PLEASING IN
APPEARANCE: ATTRACTIVE. 2:  appreciative of, RESPONSIVE TO, or zealous about the
beautiful; also: RESPONSIVE TO OR APPRECIATIVE OF WHAT IS PLEASURABLE TO
THE SENSES. (Merriam-Webster online)

THETICAL - adjective - [See Thesis.] LAID DOWN. (Webs1828)

THESIS - noun - [Latin thesis; Gr. a position, to set.] 1. A POSITION OR PROPOSITION

WHICH A PERSON ADVANCES AND OFFERS to maintain, or which is actually
maintained by argument; a theme; a subject. 2. In logic, every proposition may be divided
into thesis and hypothesis. THESIS CONTAINS THE THING AFFIRMED OR DENIED,
AND HYPOTHESIS THE CONDITIONS OF THE AFFIRMATION OR NEGATION.
(Webs1828)

—=—

!414
You will notice that money is generally never plain or ugly in its many aesthetically presented,
colorful forms. Currency is always presented in an artful way, generally portraying some patriotic
or royal imagery, and perhaps the historic, romantic deeds of past false gods (founders) or the
capitol building or castle of the current gods. The American Bald Eagle or some other symbolic
animal or other Life form often adorns the back or “tails” side of a coin, while the ancient Greek or
Romanesque copy of a bust of some past archon, ruler, president, king, or pope graces the “heads”
or capitol side. The point is that money is always presented in an aesthetically pleasing or patriotic
way, which is patently ridiculous. It is like a pig in lipstick; the Tasmanian Devil in a dress and high
heals. It is the presentation of debt as the glorious burden of the lower class. It is almost childish in
its schema. And banks are even allowed to offer credit (which is actually debt) and mortgages
(dead pledges as a promise to pay) as if these debt instruments are a wonderful product that all
consumers should possess. They are somehow a usurious part of the American Dream — that
sycophant nightmare we all make a Þctional living in because we respect mammon with such
disregard to its reason and the harmful intent of its creator gods. We love not the purpose, but the
aesthetic of money. We love the perception of what money can potentially represent. We love the
bling. We legally kill, torture, and steal for it. We covet it like nothing else, for with it we may
conquer (purchase) just about anything we desire. In other words, we can do with money what we
otherwise could not do by the Law of Nature. But to have this power of self-deception we must
rent a strawman, a legal person, a proprietary vessel in the agency of commerce. And once the
Truth is uncovered, we realize that all this was done in an agency relation-ship, in persona, and that
the gods that created that money own whatever their own money was used to pay for. In the end,
the man has nothing but debt. Every man entered into a public citizen-ship dies both morally and
monetarily bankrupt. For his stuff was purchased by the property (person and money) of another.
He used an IOU (debt) to pay for a credit (stuff). And an IOU subtracted from an equal value in
stuff equals a big fat nothing. Zero. Nihilism… It’s the ultimate magic trick, and the very reason
why money and mammon are forbidden under the New Law.

Didn’t you ever notice at the end of the game of Monopoly that all the money and all the titles and
all the characters and all the cards go back to the bank? At the end of the game, the winner has only
won the aesthetic of winning, but ultimately has only traded his precious time and labor for the
appearance of wealth, and has done so legally by harming all the other players (personas) in the
game. The winner became the landholder, and incrementally grabbed up all the title to the land, so
that all the other players become merely public citizen-ships of the game, having no land of their
own, and thus paying taxes in tribute to the landholder in dominion wherever they may publicly
travel. The game pieces (persons) of the players may only reside temporarily on each space (private
land) they trespass on after each roll. In the end, only one private landholder remains, for he has
pirated all the artiÞcial titles of the land from all the others through mammon.

What part of this “game” do you think is not also the plight of all common goyim of the nations? If
you pay property tax, you have already lost the game, or your parents lost it for you long ago. You
are just a trespasser given legal license and easement to go between public places owned by the
winner of this game of legal word trickery.

What is important about this word aesthetic is that it is absolutely not a term of Nature, any more
than money and its valuation is Natural in any way. Because money has existed in some imaginary
form for our entire lives, and because we were all brought up being addicted to its use and belief in
(love of) its indispensableness, money and the valuation it attends is perhaps the greatest
stumbling block that any man has to face. For no one is ever Truly Free while at the same time
using the property of another. And money is always a debt, no matter how much you can acquire
and hoard. More than any other magic art, money qualiÞes most as that in which the means never
justify the ends. For to respect money and its valuation in mammon, one must respect every other
creation of man in the legal realm so as to buy the legal name and title of the Real, of what is falsely
re-presented as a person, place, or thing. And so to purchase is to conquer, just as conquered men
are tricked and purchased into voluntary slavery. Inversely we can say that the vast majority of all
of man's legal laws would be pointless without money, for the very identity and reputation of any
nation is strictly engrained within the value and security of its created currency (credit) alone.

!415
One other way this word aes is used has to do with seniority; the false valuation of blood and
fabled genealogy. This, again, represents the placement of a customary and completely fallacious
title upon the valuation of the Þrst born issue of a bloodline.

ÆSNECIA - In old English law, Esnecy; the right or privilege of the eldest born. (Black4)

ANECIUS - L. Latin. Spelled also cesnecius, enitius, ceneas, eneyus, Fr. aisne. The eldest-born;
the Þrst-born; senior, as contrasted with the puis-ne (younger). (Black4)

ESNE - In old law. A hireling of servile condition. (Black4)

ESNECY - SENIORITY; THE CONDITION OR RIGHT OF THE ELDEST; THE PRIVILEGE

OF THE ELDEST-BORN. Particularly used of THE PRIVILEGE OF THE ELDEST AMONG
COPARCENERS to make a Þrst choice of purparts upon a voluntary partition. (Black4)

—=—

And so while Tarzan did absolutely nothing to build or further the family business, his supposed
blood-right of being the Þrst born heir allows him to take the entire estate away from any other
family members or usurpers upon that estate, including all proÞts and gains. This is the valuation
of mammon on inheritable blood. And it is the backbone of the entire system of private law and
estate in that private landholder trust (god) called “We, the People.” Of course, the New Testament
and Law of scripture is strictly against this subdividing of God’s Creation between false gods and
their insubstantial legal borders (nations, states, districts, counties, cities, etc.). How can It not be so
opposed? However, since we are uncovering the trappings of the legal system, we must learn about
these aesthetics of the blood game in detail. And by the end of this Þrst Volume, this game of piracy
and how we have all fallen as willing victims to it through the pretended, legal attainder of our
own blood in public person-hood will be quite clear. For as it turns out, there are many prodigal
sons (Þrst borns) among us, and all of us have become lost on the sea of commerce and swinging
like apes in the jungle of inequity. And we have no control over the nation because we have no
control over the actual land/territory that nation re-presents. For it contains nothing Real, only the
legal status, title, and estate of artiÞcial persons, places, and things.

Whole movements have been set up with the theme of restoring our country. And yet none of these
activists seem to realize that without taking the land (territory) back in rightful heirship, there is no
way of restoring the country. Only the private landholders of each State (People) are represented by
government. All others are merely subjects (goyim) of any Þctional nation. For there is no land in
the nation, just imaginary districts of control to protect the private People from the peopled
multitude of common goy.

Valuation, most importantly, causes all things to become Truly impersonal. Valuation kills empathy,
causes false perspective, and destroys the capacity for Higher Reasoning. To put a price on any
form of Life, on what is priceless, is to this author the ultimate sin. And yet we live our legal,
spiritually dead, civil lives doing exactly that on a daily basis. To magically place a legal value and
title upon even the land is to taint it with Þction and artiÞcially remove it from GodÕs Dominion,
Oneness, and Law. The shameful Truth is that this shameless attraction to useful shiny objects
instead as merely money (like gold and silver) actually kills their purpose of Existence and
potential of use in Nature. It is the treating of Nature not by its True totality of combined substance
or potential, and instead as the re-sourcing and hoarding of only its more appealing, aesthetically
pleasing parts. What is “garbage” but what is suddenly aesthetically unappealing? Are a billion
starving children then merely garbage? What is pollution but the result of what is stripped from its
Natural setting and wholeness only to be wasted in order to harvest or create something appealing,
something that does not occur Naturally? And yet no single element on the mineral chart found in
the earth and sea is more valuable than oxygen, especially when compounded, invisible, and wet!
But we pollute the air (mostly N2O2) and foul the water (H2O) so as to extract the pretty,
aesthetically pleasing minerals at 1 part per trillion, ravishing the landscape and devouring the

!416
substance and force of the cycles of Life around us. All of this because we have been taught to
worship God not as all of Nature in True Equity and as a priceless Oneness, but as some external,
often villainous overlord watching over us like Santa Claus with a naughty and nice list.

As untainted men of God’s Nature and Law we would never resort to referencing or using
impersonal verbs, for we would at all times be Living in Reality. We would always be in the
present, and would respect all things only by their self-evident Existence, by their True Nature in
the Þrst person (without mask). Thus all things would be Naturally personal (not of a Þctional
persona) and thus precious in regard to our mind, body, and soul as the only internal and external
Oneness of Self. What we would harm we would do so directly, consciously, empathetically, and
without false considerations that we have only harmed the Þctional aspect of anything or that any
law and license allows such harm to artiÞcial constructs of the legal matrix. For the True, self-
Existent man is only a subservient part of and therefore at One with Nature. Names and titles of all
things (words) would have no legal meaning, authority, or value in mammon, remaining purely as
sincere descriptions and Truths about Reality based solely on sense. Respect no non-sense! This
trinity and wholeness of man simply cannot be referred to impersonally. The third person is never of
God. It is always a subjective Þction, a false history told or foretold, as Reality in form and name
only. And the personal affairs and effects of a third person are always the property of another,
generally of the state; the creator of that legal Þction and its terms of art. Thus the verb (action) of
legal persons can only be expressed in noun form, in the words of legal actions, on legal paper, and
in legal appearance where man represents the legal person and his actions are recognized as being
done therefore “in persona.” This is the false existence we all suffer from. Our actions are
impersonal to our own and to each other’s Natural Being and foreign to God’s Design of Nature.
For we have legal standing only, never setting foot in or protecting from evil our own Reality and
Source.

The grand impersonator and artiÞcer of each of our ÒselvesÓ promotes in us a mistaken id-entity
through this nominative nomenclature, for the dualistic reasons of causing us to live in error by
ignoring our True Nature under God, and by causing us to continuously be in a state of mis-
understanding through utter confusion of the fact that the objective Self has in-deed been stolen
and branded as a subjective species of persona (class and status). For to legally understand any-
thing, with or without knowledge of what it is we are agreeing to under-stand (to stand under the
law and authority of), only means to stand under the authority of that administrator or agent and
its law. Thus the person becomes more powerful than us, than our Real Self, and the law of persons
is allowed by us by choice to trump the law and authority of Jehovah in lieu of these false legal
gods (the creators and rulers of Þctional persons, names, numbers, languages, marks, and titles).

Yet again we see that comprehension of the true meanings of legal terms doesn’t cause them to be
dismissed. Magic would not be magical if it did not cause illusion and delusion through trickery,
and a victim would not be a victim if there were not a reaper (mercenarily militarized government)
of that spiritual death through said legal word-trickery.

—=—

“A COUNTY IS A PERSON in a legal sense,


BUT A SOVEREIGN IS NOT.”
ÑLancaster Co, v. Trimble. 34 Neb. 752. 52 N.W. 711 - and - In re Fox, 52 N.Y. 535, 11 Am. Rep. 751; U. S. v. Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 24 L. Ed. 192 (Black4)

—=—

Obviously a county is not a natural person. And so a count must therefore be an artiÞcial person.
All counties, in other words, are municipal corporations! And they exist only under the law and
subordination of the “sovereign.” I cannot stress enough that every city, county, and state, and each
district and association therein, are all artiÞcial persons (corporations). But most important to this

!417
fact is that no man is ever a part of any corporation, only his status (persona). The state is a false
god, which gives birth to the counties and cities and all other government agencies. You must not
mistake these as anything but what they are, artiÞcial constructs of the legal matrix designed to
control every aspect of your Life so as to beneÞt the entire corporate structure that calls itself as a
sovereign nation. There is no Life, and thus no True Law, no Nature, and No God within this realm
of Þctional persons, any more than there is any sign of Real Life in any rendered cartoon.

Men become likened to zombies, mere shells existing solely for legal parasites to govern them as
their mental puppet-masters, while the main parasite called the “universal” church in its self-
proclaimed divinity governs over all governments (heads) in vicarious, blasphemous sovereignty,
like a gigantic hive mind regulating its interconnected, open-air debtor’s hell on earth. God’s True
Nature is legally pealed away like the Þlm of an old Polaroid picture in order to leave only the false
image and form of some virtual reality as a legal consideration, controlled ultimately by the false
papal ofÞce as vicar of God (false christ). All legal persons, places, and things (nouns) are merely lies,
images, and forms as false idols, including all corporations (artiÞcial persons) calling themselves as
“religions.” It is this form and appearance only that is named, organized, and patented (letters
patent) into the nomenclature (catalogues of words/names) of the legal Þction ÒlawÓ books and
registers of the registrar. These are the Books of the DeadÉ CaesarÕs tax register.

Ultimately, ironically, the pope is and can only be the false god of the spiritually dead; of those who
turn from Jehovah, from their very own Self and Nature, to worship the idolatry and symbolism of
the universal “One Church” and its simulated God-head land-lord.

This will all be perfectly clear and succinctly examined should you endeavor to complete this work.

—=—

“The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of

WORDS. IF YOU CAN CONTROL THE MEANING OF WORDS, YOU
CAN CONTROL THE PEOPLE WHO MUST USE THEM.”
―Philip K. Dick

—=—

Remember that religion is just a word, and is a verb in its actual source. True religion is a lifestyle in
this way, not a person (body corporate). But when a corporation (artiÞcial person) calls itself a
“religion” by legally assigned name (noun) only, the action (verb) of religion (Law) and Its
authority under Jehovah is nulliÞed, becoming merely an artiÞcial title (noun) with no substance; a
Þctional persona; a mask worn by the unfaithful. To be part of a religion (noun) is in no way to Live
and be a part of God’s Design (verb). So a man acting within a legal person-hood can never act
upon his True religious (foundational) Law and moral beliefs (verb), for the legal law of false
corporate “religion” is under the law of the legal state (false god/sovereignty), and so supersedes
the ability of the man acting in surety to a public persona from following his moral conscious (as
the True Religious practice/action of Natural Law). A corporation is only ever a legal creation, and
bound only by the doctrines of man. It should never to be confused as a creation or self-evident
Truth of God. The religious doctrine (law) of corporate churches and scripture are several (foreign)
to each other. Religion by name (denomination) should never be confused with the Bible, even
though the Bible is used fallaciously to justify the corporation (artiÞcial person) that is the religion,
even against the teachings of the scriptures within. Religion is a paradox when compared to the
actual scriptural teachings that are adversarial to such secondary and false doctrines (laws) of man.

DOCTRINE - A RULE, PRINCIPLE, theory, or TENET OF THE LAW; as, the doctrine of
merger, the doctrine of relation, etc. (Black4)

—=—

!418
I say to the reader here again, the Bible is not religion. The Bible is Law! When the scriptures tell us
to have no other doctrine before the Bible, they are telling us to take no other law.

Certainly the Bible was written and transcribed by man, this is not in question. The key to
discernment between manÕs Þctional religious doctrines of strictly written law and GodÕs Law
(Word, or Logos) as emulated by the scriptures is only the unwritten, self-evident Truth of those
writings. Truth (of self-evidence and self-Existence) is the litmus test. That which leads to self-
evident Truth in any form is a scriptural tool. We know the Word of God simply because no amount
of reason or logical fallacy can defeat It, and because It attempts to justify no thing or idea that is
opposed to GodÕs Nature of the Reality of self-Existence as corporate religions do. It grants no
license to ignore Its own teachings even as the church pretends to forgive such sins while
promoting man’s law of the land. It allows no ßattering titles, including that of preacher, minister,
magi, king, pope, rabbi, or other word of supposed “professional” legal status.

As I write this, I anticipate and hope that the reader will recognize that same substance of self-
evidence in my own words presented within this work. I seek only to uncover that which has been
hidden under the rose and thus to destroy the mysteries that are kept private and thus used to rule
over us in our vulgarity of public-mindedness. For it seems that the conclusion of all this is that
self-evidence (God) is the only weapon able to defeat the artiÞcial concoctions of man, or that
which has no self-evidence and must be proven to legally exist not in Nature but as artiÞcial
property of Þctional persons.

For our purposes we must know that the surname (the last name attached to the christian/given-
name) destroys sovereignty (blood) and thus the man of God under legal surname cannot ever
hold a perfect title. The surname is a debtor name, and debtors (citizenships) will always be in a
state of alienation by other men. Bankrupt. A lien will forever be held against any entitlement (title)
to real estate as land and to public property in the name of another.

The legal language is but a grammatical set of Þctitious terms of art (artiÞce), ordained as the false
dialectic (logic) and fallacious rhetoric of the legal gods (magistrates). These words make up a
realm built completely upon imaginary concepts by the i-magi-nations of men seeking to escape
their own Nature and limitations (Laws) thereof. They are the gods of their own artiÞcially created
legal realm, which is only a subliminal palace of artful words bearing no substance at all.

When we examine the pecking order of this word “god,” we see a pronounced legal hierarchy; a
devolution from the Supreme God of the Universe and all that is that Permanent Creation of all
Nature (Jehovah), to the mere legal appearance of men as stand-in replacement-gods in some
legally created ofÞce. The Reality of God is turned into a legal Þction; the verb into a mere noun/
empty name. The further this authority and corruption through legal artiÞce is attributed to the
name of ÒGodÓ as it is incorporated with the word Òman,Ó the more deÞnite and speciÞc the legal
terms and in-deed the forms and graven images of ÒGodÓ and Òthe godsÓ become. And so we
arrive again at our main question, which is not to ask who, what, where, how, or why is God, but
simply what does this word ÒGodÓ mean when deÞned in the Bible and in other sources?

In the simplest of discourse, allow me to plainly state here the difference between a good and an evil
man, which is merely this: a good man seeks knowledge from Nature so as to be more like, respect,
and honor God (through christÕs example) and thus instinctively protects the Design of GodÕs
realm of Nature (Creation). He knows his place and harmoniously bears only his self-evident
Nature of Existence.

An evil man seeks knowledge so as to make some imaginary form and manipulation of ÒGodÓ
appear to be characteristically human (animal), thus attempting to remake God in manÕs image and
form, and to assign the imperfection of human attributes upon Jehovah in personiÞcation so as to
hide the perfection of GodÕs Design of Nature. For only if GodÕs Design is falsely declared and
ÒlegalizedÓ as imperfect and hu-man may man be allowed to pretend justiÞcation and protection
for his actions in partaking of his own re-design of that Nature and Law while acting in GodÕs

!419
name as vicar; a scientiÞc dictatorship which abhors independent spiritual thought. In other words,
an evil man respects names and titles over the Reality of their Source and worships symbols,
images, and simulations over the Reality they re-present in Nature.

Good and evil, again, are just words. They may be used as adjectives, verbs, and nouns. And though
no emotion need be attached to know what is Real and what is false, emotion certainly is used in
advertising and through other propagandist means to make us accept evil over good. But we can
comprehend these wordsÕ main purpose in the scriptural teachings by simply knowing what is
Real and what is art. That which represents and simulates Existence is always false, no matter how
Real it seems or appears, and no matter how wondrous its artist re-presents it. This is evil. And from
belief (love) and respect of the artiÞce (evil) comes the actions we call as sin. But certainly no good
can come (be born) of artiÞciality. The terms are less difÞcult to grasp than one might think when
the artiÞce of church and state are removed from the picture, which rely solely on evil (art), from
money to political status, for their own legal existence.

We could take this as far as to say that which is self-powered is good, and that which must be
plugged-in and/or recharged is evil. For art and technology are of the exact same meaning. Here is
where choice presents itself once again. If that which is available as technology requires a legal
persona to receive such a beneÞt, then it is evil. If that technology is not attached to such
inducements and can be operated freely without public overview and surcharge, registration, or
tax, then reason prevails and it may be used with good intent and without sacriÞcing our spiritual
Life under the Moral Law for the beneÞt of all men without legal strings attached. Most things that
seem too good to be True (that which is found outside of Nature) are likely to come with some
strings attached to its artiÞcial construct, which ultimately may pull us back into the Þctional id-
entity of satanÕs contracts. If we need license to operate some thing, this is clearly evil, since a
license requires a strawman and therefore acceptance of the entire legal law of persons. It is due to
this ability to apply good reason upon each individual case that our choices may remain Pure. And
so we must consciously keep this Higher Law of Jehovah in our minds eye at all times. For around
every corner is another tree full of the fruit of good and evil ready to be plucked and consumed.
Each fruit very likely has an opposing Þsher of menÕs (tax collectorÕs) hook baited with temptation
to leave Reality (God) hidden within. Choice is upon every and all things in this Life. Choice is a
lifestyle, not a singular election or single point in time, as the church leads us to believe through its
registered member-ships. Men of God do not choose to be and receive the empty name of
ÒChristianÓ for show and political reputation, we Live in God and christÕs meaning and Law at all
times against and in spite of those artful institutions that would falsely humble us with such
Þctions and ßattering titles of publicity and blood.

Now see here the absolute corruption through devolution of what is the idea and re-imagination of
God through the artiÞce and duality of legalistic word magic, as deÞned before your very eyes:

DEVOLUTION - noun - [Latin] 1. The act of rolling down; as the devolution of earth into a
valley. 2. REMOVAL FROM ONE PERSON TO ANOTHER; A PASSING OR FALLING
UPON A SUCCESSOR. (Webs1828)

JEHOVAH - (repeated) - noun - The Scripture name of the Supreme BEING. If, as is supposed,
this name is from the Hebrew SUBSTANTIVE VERB, the word denotes the Permanent Being,
as the primary sense of the substantive VERB in all languages, is to be Þxed, to stand, to
remain or abide. This is a name peculiarly appropriate to the ETERNAL SPIRIT, THE
UNCHANGEABLE GOD, who describes himself thus, I AM THAT I AM. Exodus 3:14.
(Webs1828)

GOD - noun - 1. The Supreme Being; JEHOVAH; the eternal and inÞnite spirit, THE
CREATOR, and the SOVEREIGN OF THE UNIVERSE. GOD is a SPIRIT; and they that
worship him, MUST WORSHIP HIM IN SPIRIT AND IN TRUTH. John 4:24É (Webs1828)

!420
GOD - noun - …2. A FALSE GOD; A HEATHEN DEITY; AN IDOL. Fear not the gods of the
Amorites. Judges 6:10. 3. A PRINCE; A RULER; A MAGISTRATE OR JUDGE; an angel.
Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people. Exodus 22:28. Psalms 97:7…
4. ANY PERSON OR THING EXALTED TOO MUCH IN ESTIMATION, or DEIFIED AND
HONORED AS THE CHIEF GOOD. Whose god is their belly. Philippians 3:19. - verb
transitive - To deify… (Webs1828)

CREATOR - noun - [Latin] 1. The BEING or PERSON that creates. Remember thy creator in
the days of thy youth. Ecclesiastes 12:1. 2. The THING that creates, produces or CAUSES.
(Webs1828)

SUPREME - adjective - [Latin supremus, from supra.] 1. HIGHEST IN AUTHORITY;

HOLDING THE HIGHEST PLACE IN GOVERNMENT OR POWER. In the United States,
THE CONGRESS IS SUPREME in regulating commerce and in making war and peace. The
parliament of Great Britain is supreme in legislation; BUT THE KING IS SUPREME IN
THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT. IN THE UNIVERSE, GOD ONLY IS
THE SUPREME RULER AND JUDGE. HIS COMMANDS ARE SUPREME AND BINDING
ON ALL HIS CREATURES. 2. Highest, greatest or most excellent; as supreme love; supreme
glory; supreme degree. 3. It is sometimes used in a bad sense; as supreme folly or baseness,
folly or baseness carried to the utmost extent. [A bad use of the word.] (Webs1828)

SOVEREIGN - adjective - suv’eran. [We retain this barbarous orthography from the Norman
sovereign. The true spelling would be suveran from the Latin supernes, superus.] 1. Supreme in
power; POSSESSING SUPREME DOMINION; as a SOVEREIGN RULER OF THE
UNIVERSE. 2. Supreme; superior to all others; CHIEF. GOD IS THE SOVEREIGN GOOD
OF ALL WHO LOVE AND OBEY HIM. 3. Supremely efÞcacious; superior to all others;
predominant; effectual; as a sovereign remedy. 4. SUPREME; PERTAINING TO THE FIRST
MAGISTRATE OF A NATION; AS SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY. - noun - suv’eran. 1. A
SUPREME LORD OR RULER; one who possesses THE HIGHEST AUTHORITY
WITHOUT CONTROL. Some earthly princes, kings and emperors are sovereigns in their
dominions. 2. A SUPREME MAGISTRATE; A KING. 3. A gold coin of England, value (of)
$4.44. (Webs1828)

MAGISTERIAL - adjective - [See Magistrate.] Pertaining to a MASTER; such as suits a

master; authoritative. 1. Proud; lofty; arrogant; imperious; domineering. Pretenses go a great
way with men that take fair words and magisterial looks for current payment. (Webs1828)

MAGISTRATE - noun - [Latin magistratus, from magister, MASTER; magis, major, and ster,
Teutonic steora, a director; steoran, to steer; the PRINCIPAL director.] A PUBLIC CIVIL
OFFICER, INVESTED WITH THE EXECUTIVE GOVERNMENT or some BRANCH of it. In
this sense, a KING is the highest or Þrst magistrate AS IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES. But the word is more particularly applied to subordinate ofÞcers, as
governors, intendants, prefects, mayors, justices of the peace, and the like. THE
MAGISTRATE MUST HAVE HIS REVERENCE; THE LAWS THEIR AUTHORITY.
(Webs1828)

ALER A DIEU - Late French. In old practice. To be DISMISSED from court; TO GO QUIT.
Literally, "TO GO TO GOD.” (Black4)

MASTER - noun - [Latin magister, compounded of the root of magis, major, GREATER.] 1. A
MAN WHO RULES, GOVERNS OR DIRECTS either men or business. A man who owns
slaves is their master; he who has SERVANTS is their master; he who has APPRENTICES is
their master as he has the GOVERNMENT and direction of them. The man who
superintends and directs any business, is master or master workman… NATIONS THAT
WANT PROTECTORS, WILL HAVE MASTERS. 2. A director, HEAD, or CHIEF
MANAGER; as the master of a feast. 3. The owner; proprietor; with the idea of governing.

!421
 The master of a house may be the owner, or the occupant, who has a TEMPORARY right of
governing it. It would be believed that he rather took the horse for his subject, than his master.
4. A LORD; a ruler; ONE WHO HAS SUPREME DOMINION. CAESAR, the world's great
master AND HIS OWN. 5. A chief; A PRINCIPAL; as the master root of a plant. One master
passion swallows up the rest. 6. One who has possession, and the power of controlling or
using at pleasure. When I have made myself master of a hundred thousand drachmas— 7.
The commander of a merchant ship… 10. ONE UNCONTROLLED. Let every man be master
of his time. 11. An appellation of RESPECT. Master doctor, you have brought those drugs…
13. A man eminently or perfectly skilled in any occupation, ART or science. We say, a man is
master of his business; a great master of music, of the ßute or violin; a master of his
SUBJECT, etc. 14. A TITLE of dignity in colleges and universities; as master of Arts. 15. The
chief of a society; as the Grand master of Malta, of free-masons, etc… TO BE MASTER OF
ONE'S SELF, to have the command or control of one's own passions. The word master has
numerous applications, in all of which it has the sense of director, chief or superintendent.
As a TITLE OF RESPECT given to adult PERSONS, it is pronounced MISTER; a
pronunciation which seems to have been derived from some of the northern dialects. [supra.] -
verb intransitive - TO CONQUER; to overpower; to subdue; TO BRING UNDER
CONTROL… EVIL CUSTOMS MUST BE MASTERED BY DEGREES. 1. To execute with
skill. I will not offer that which I cannot master. 2. To rule; TO GOVERN. --And rather father
thee than master thee… (Webs1828)

—=—

So what does the word “god” mean? Perhaps now we may under-stand that no matter what we do
we will always and at all times have our personal God, be it man as the creator of the Þction we
pretend to operate in or the True Creator of man and all of Nature (self-Existence). It is words and
words alone that establishes the evidence of either realm, for when words control our actions, we
may either be controlled by man’s words (law) or God’s Word (christ’s actions as described and
exempliÞed as Law). To put it simply, ÒGodÓ is exactly what we can be con-vinced and persuaded
to believe (love) is our mastered lawmaker. This will never change, which is why christ’s message
is a lifestyle of permanent choice, not a story book to be read and conveniently forgotten every
Sunday while evil men inßuence and alter the intent of every aspect of Life and Nature through
corporate licensure.

The legal person (status) for which man is in surety to exists in slavery under its source (creator and
principal). Therefore, in order to act in that persona, man must consent to a voluntary servitude
(slavery) for himself through the insurance bond of surety to that strawman. He must follow the
law of that god of false, Þctional creation. This voluntary servitude is contractual, consensual, and
is expressed by every action we take in person, from our signature to the taxes we pay.

“Evil customs must be mastered by degrees…” and this is why upon the completion of public and
university education programs (mental reprogramming) we may receive a degree of crime called a
diploma (diplomacy and diplomatic immunity by license to commit organized crime), as a master’s
degree, as permissive license by the state to commit evils against the Reality of the Order and
Design of God’s Nature. This is called syndicalism, and its most ardent form anarcho-syndicalism is
the organized chaos of public-minded slavery through public institutions and education (the
training of animals to do tricks). We become only a master of the title bestowed upon our strawman,
and at best a master of dog-Latin; the kings of technical illiteracy.

The public education process is designed to hone in on man’s individual (unique) personality and
force it to condone and profess the immoral or amoral, legal state of things. To educate is to train by
profession (word) of some aspect of commerce. And so the ultimate goal of education is to control
individual personality (verb) so as to conform man into a professional (noun), where the words of
the man are not his own personal opinion but that of the syndicalist associations and corporations
(artiÞcial persons) that control industry and create ofÞcial information. In this day and age a True 




!422
personality untainted by Þction is perhaps an impossible attainment. For we are all entrained to
profess the Þction of that legal matrix and its syndicalist, consensus-based opinions as our law, our
non-religious belief (love).

—=—

“Personality is the supreme realization of the innate idiosyncrasy of a

living being. It is an ACT of courage ßung in the face of life, the
absolute afÞrmation of all that constitutes the individual, the most
successful adaptation to the universal conditions of existence, coupled
with the greatest possible freedom of self-determination.”
—C. G. Jung, "The Development of Personality," 1932

—=—

OneÕs personality is thus a reßection of the inner balance or imbalance of oneÕs mind, body, and
soul with God and Its Nature. When the conditions of manÕs Existence are so overwhelmingly
based on conÞrming, servicing, and fulÞlling the big legal lie that even his own person is subject to,
then his own Self-determination ceases to be the forerunner or driver of his personality. His
individuality necessarily gets moved to the back of the line behind the legal, artiÞcial, individual
strawman (agency) he re-presents himself to be continuously in name, title, and for commercial
purposes. When every aspect of this civil life revolves around the pursuit, increase, and spending of
money, then perhaps the average publicly oriented, non-spiritual personality of the typical public
citizenship of the United States and of other nations is not surprising. In fact it is scientiÞcally
speaking to be expected, while at the same time scripturally just what was forewarned.

What else can be expected from a people that embrace the laws of church and state in combination
and in pursuit of its own conspired well-being over that of their very own Nature?

—=—

“Formerly there were those who said: You believe things that are
incomprehensible, inconsistent, impossible BECAUSE WE HAVE
COMMANDED YOU TO BELIEVE THEM; GO THEN AND DO
WHAT IS UNJUST BECAUSE WE COMMAND IT. Such people show
admirable reasoning. TRULY, WHOEVER IS ABLE TO MAKE YOU
ABSURD IS ABLE TO MAKE YOU UNJUST. IF THE GOD-GIVEN
UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR MIND DOES NOT RESIST A
DEMAND TO BELIEVE WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE, THEN YOU WILL
NOT RESIST A DEMAND TO DO WRONG TO THAT GOD-GIVEN
SENSE OF JUSTICE IN YOUR HEART. AS SOON AS ONE FACULTY
OF YOUR SOUL HAS BEEN DOMINATED, OTHER FACULTIES WILL
FOLLOW AS WELL. And from this derives all those CRIMES OF
RELIGION WHICH HAVE OVERRUN THE WORLD.”
—Voltaire, ’Questions sur les miracles’ (1765)

—=—

!423
It is important to note again that this word animal merely means “without soul,” as will be more
deeply examined later, and is a reference to men acting as public persons (goyim/chattel) of all the
nations called citizen-ships, as the Þctional living of a spiritual death in Life. The notion of
animalistic behavior refers to the controlled baser instincts and autonomic response that man acts
by when commercially operating in the person and therefore Þxed law of another, that is, without
personal responsibility for his own actions. This is a soulless life through Þctional means. Of course
a Þctional character has no soul, and neither does man when he assumes that cartoon identity and
governed (controlled) quality of personhood in bond and surety. The degrees and diplomas he may
obtain and attach to his state surname, as well as that artiÞcial, ßattering title allowed and be-
stowed in employment (use) of that degree of licensed crime in such a corporate Þction system, can
only be applied by the state upon the stateÕs creation, a Þctional persona under which we attend
that school as a legally registered (taxed) surname and number. Men hold no titles, for the body
and soul has no capacity for such intangible, legal artiÞce. A True man in True Faith of Jehovah
would Þnd titles worthless within GodÕs Nature and Law, for a man of God would seek to rule
over no other man nor over GodÕs Nature, only to protect its Natural state of Being in all ways.
Only artiÞcial things (person-hoods) may hold artiÞcial titles. It is only the stateÕs own property
(person/status) upon which these degrees, credentials and titles are bestowed and taken away, and
are therefore never the property of any man, even of he who so proudly and in vain bears them.
Thus, the animal (legally considered soulless man in false persona) is trained, normalized, and
beset upon the artiÞcial legal realm of commerce and public intercourse, mindlessly occupying an
imaginary status (noun/name) while believing himself to actually be his false, Þctional title.

This, of course, is spoken about sharply and yet eloquently in the Bible (see Galatians 6:1-4). We all
fool ourselves in this way, believing our legal, artiÞcially projected self-image to be something
when we are in Reality no thing (noun/name) at all. And most of us seek such diplomatic license to
offend Nature by some degree of crime so as to sacriÞce it and our True Selves (souls) to the god of
mammon. For with money, any thing (noun) seems possible. And yet without money, there are no
limits but what GodÕs Nature and Design intended for us as the Highest Law. This is merely more
of that beautiful self-evidence of True Faith as compared to pretended faith (worship of false truth)
in Þction, in the big legal lie, even as we seek to overcome our own meticulously, scientiÞcally
designed and therefore unnatural limits by distorting the Natural Order of all aspects of Jehovah.
And all this in the pursuit of more money to accomplish and pretend more artiÞcial things (nouns)
and act in more character parts (titles). Unlimited, unrepentant progress in the virtue and name of
that which is adversarial (satanic) to Nature. We seek the means to and progress only towards a
more organized chaos of hell, an enhanced public imprisonment for the mind, body, and soul —
the perfection of simulation.

—=—

“The vile person shall be no more called liberal, nor the churl said to be
bountiful. For the vile person will speak villany, and his heart will work
iniquity, to practise hypocrisy, and to utter error against the LORD, to
make empty the soul of the hungry, and he will cause the drink of the
thirsty to fail. THE INSTRUMENTS ALSO OF THE CHURL ARE EVIL:
HE DEVISETH WICKED DEVICES TO DESTROY THE POOR WITH
LYING WORDS, even when the needy speaketh right.”
—Isaiah 32: 5-7, KJB

—=—

A quick translation reveals the ÒchurlÓ as Strong's H3596 (kiylay), meaning fraudulent, deceitful,
crafty, and niggardly. The use of ÒinstrumentsÓ of these Òchurl,Ó as Strong's H3627 (kĕliy), refers to

!424
the ARTICLES, utensils, implements, apparatus, Arms bearing (armourbearer), and more
speciÞcally the Þctional receptacle or VESSEL that this work seeks to expose, as the articles (i.e.
cannons) of law and of the constitutions of private men in a compact of blood (Arms), and the legal
person-hood and citizen-ship that we call as that vessel of mammon in commerce. These are the
legal instruments of the deceitful pirates of the word-craft. Even the phrase Òdeviseth wicked
devicesÓ as translated from Strong's H2154 (zimmah) refers Þrstly to the advice of legal or other
council, in both a good (Natural) and bad (artiÞcial) sense, as the adding of vice. ItÕs also said to be
wickedness, as a wicked DEED, translated from other passages in various scriptures with the
words lewdness, wickedness, mischief, lewd, heinous crime, wicked devices, lewdly, wicked
mind, purposes, and thought. Ultimately, the purpose of all these designs and articles is to destroy
the Naturally occurring qualities of man in his meekness, through the devilish temptations of the
artiÞce, of money, and of the various sins he might not partake in without license from some falsely
believed in authority Þgure (legal and ecclesiastical gods). The council of these lawmakers,
attorneys, and priests are said to be the causal manifestation of zimmah, which is to trick the meek
and content man, the meek Being he participating only in his accepted place in Nature under God,
to be in a causal state not chaste, as one of incest, licentiousness, adultery, idolatry, and harlotry.
The articles of law and the articles of faith and religion are these wicked devises spoken of in
scripture; woe be to the scribes and lawyers and priests who promote deceit and cause men to pray
publicly to the gods of the legal systems (councils) of the corruption of man. From birth (creation of
the legal vessel [kĕliy]) we are taught to think legally and act publicly instead of thinking spiritually
and acting privately, not according to any scriptural, moral law but by the amoral and often
designedly immoral articles of the false law and artful doctrines.

As we follow these ancient terms of the Bible down to their root components, we Þnd not the
design itself but the intent. Design, of course, follows and is relative to intent. And so with the
word zimmah we Þnd its root in Strong's H2161 (zamam) which means to have a thought, to devise,
to plan, to consider, to purpose, from the verb Qal, meaning to consider, to Þx thought upon, to
purpose (as to re-purpose or re-source) or to devise a plan, and to plot (with evil intent). And so
we could also use the words conspiracy, combination, and confederacy here, all meaning the same
thing, so as to understand the intent of church and state. In other words, the creation of the federal
district was done with the intent to commercially enslave the common population in a voluntary,
contractual performance debt. This word zaman as used in the scriptures also carries the meanings,
according to the Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon, of to tie and to bind. Secondly, it refers to the
concept of to lie in wait, to plot, to purpose, or to meditate evil. And in its most speciÞc
contemplation, we Þnd the Arabic Þgurative idea of the thought and plan of purposing something
to oneself, as a matter of intention, or to intend with selÞshness. As we move on within this work,
the reader will soon come to realize that the very purpose of the existence of these governmental
and religious entities is just this, to lie in wait plotting the piracy of every child, with the intent to
steal all menÕs birthright as blood consideration, and to re-direct through causality all menÕs
purpose to follow mammon for the beneÞt of its legal creator gods. The best way to do this is to
create a system of control over menÕs minds (govern-ment) so as to cause man to be Þxed in his
actions in a debt contract to that system. Remember, to be legally free is to be in contracted franchise.
This is not Natural Freedom under God, but only a voluntary, open-air jurisdictional servitude as
opposed to a closed prison. And so the purpose of these systems of legal law and religious articles
of faith is to cause man to be limited, to be Þxed, and to be tied down and bonded (in binding) so
that man acts according to the law that accompanies his status within that system of pre-meditated,
evil intent. As much as this author wishes this were not the case, this work is intended to stand as
evidence only through the exposure of their own rare supporting words, opinions, laws, and
customs. And so painfully and with a heavy heart we must continue to uncover here this unseen
hand that controls us.

Finally, we may now understand the intent of this scriptural passage when it states that the vile
person can no longer be called liberal. This spiritual word is used incorrectly by almost every
artiÞcial source of information out there, from the nightly news to the pundits that write and parrot
the same talking points over and over and over with every election. But we must know that in
history, the so-called Òfounding fathersÓ were indeed referred to as liberals or liberal-minded. They

!425
obviously weren’t conservative or public-minded now were they, considering they started a new
form of government for themselves and their own private bloodline (posterity)? And so we must
relearn the intent and purpose of this word so that we can understand its demonization in the
public media. We must seek the reasoning as to why the “person” causes the man to be vile by
becoming Þxed (conserved) within a set system of government and law.

The word liberal as translated from Strong's H5081 (nadiyb) is deÞned as an adjective describing
men who are inclined, willing, noble, generous, who live by being incited, inclined, willing, and
also THOSE WHO BY TITLE ALONE ARE CONSIDERED AS NOBLE, PRINCELY (IN RANK),
and inversely those pious, regenerate men who no longer allow man’s law to district their actions
in public persona, BEING AS WELL NOBLE (IN MIND AND CHARACTER). As a noun, used
only as a ßattering title without works, liberal also refers to a noble one. Words like noble are of
course dependent upon perspective, as a man of God is noble (verb) in the Þgurative eyes of
Jehovah in his piety, whereas a ranked and genealogically titled nobleman (noun/title) only exists
in the eyes of the Þctional church and state. Here again it is the difference between acting Truly
noble (verb) versus the falsehood of assuming a Þctional, ßattering title (noun) based purely on
pretended histories and fabled genealogies or upon educative syndicalism and rewards of criminal
degrees in diplomacy. Needless to say, how this word liberal is used today is a far cry from its origin
of intent (True meaning). But most important to comprehend is that the Truly liberal man’s Life and
actions are favorable to God, for his actions alone establish his reputation, not some term of art in
empty, ßattering title. And so the man who accepts and virtually becomes the vile person of another,
as a public person in a citizen-ship under the laws of the United States, is automatically thought to
be ignoble and non-liberal, for a slave has no such qualities and its actions are controlled
(governed) not by GodÕs Law of Nature, but by the artful sanctions of the Þxed-law beast system.
To be Þxed (in legal persona, name, number, title, etc.) is to be opposed to liberality (Natural
liberty). And so the underlying lesson to be learned is that True nobility (verb) is earned through
permanent, Lawful action, not handed over like a merit badge or fabled pedigree. To be noble in
our actions is to obey the Highest Law at all times, and that means to never allow our actual noble
Being to be subsumed by ßattering titles that require no action to hold that purely Þctional
character.

Ironically, only the worst kind of men carry these unearned, false titles of nobility while the meek
share equally (with equal right) in the surname title of their fellow hu-man capital subjects. And yet
this is exactly how the Bible foretold it would always be, at least for as long as these names and
ßattering titles of fabled genealogies and political debauchery were respected by otherwise good
men. Our public birth into citizenship, of course, ensures such respect as the norm of societal
functionality enforced by law and sanction, as ridiculous as it is. To be in public personhood and
citizenship, it is a requirement to respect these legalistic gods and magistrates or be held in
contempt!

As a side-note, it is very important to consider just what the intent and purpose (zimmah) of debt is.
Money in and of itself as the reason for debt is virtually insigniÞcant as to that actual plan and
purposeful design and reasoning for the creation of a contract of debt. Remember that mammon is
not money in and of itself, but the valuation it implies upon every aspect of Nature and of Þctional
things, ideas, concepts, works, etc. In other words, evil men may easily justify their evil actions to
break the Natural Law and do as much harm as they see Þt to a debtor simply because that very act
of violent force, be it a broken or cut off Þnger or the repurposing (foreclosure) of oneÕs home (to
pay loan debt) or imprisonment in a debtor’s prison; each of these has a value in money attached to
them. Pay your debt or we kidnap your child for its own “safety and “protection.” Pay your debt or
we take everything you foolishly thought you owned. And so the purpose of debt is not money.
Money is merely the inducement to contract. The true purpose of debt, just as the constitution is a
debt compact between private (several) States, is to instill desired performance. Debt ensures
performance, especially when the debtor unwittingly agrees to the entirety of the US Code, which
blatantly exclaims his right to be put in pain, punished, taxed, licensed, and exacted (extorted)
from, as enforced violently by law. While the monetary value of things certainly induces man to
put his faith and trust in pursuit of credit in that money system of debt and accept usury as if it

!426
were some necessary evil as a contracted dis-ease (a word-magic trick of mammon), the result of
that inducement and vain pursuit is to compile performance and abeyance to the law. Thus all debt
is a performance debt, whether money is involved or not. For in the system of mammon, every
action carries a value, and every man is considered only by his potential labor output as human
capital. And so the notion of citizenship is nothing more than being a permanent debtor, to be
always required to perform while in a sort of contractual suspense, waiting hopefully for some
sudden redemption. And so they give us false religion so that we never break the spell, remaining
as debtors in Þction waiting for some supernatural redeemer as a Christos God-Þgure, and thus
never causing our own actions of Self to actually be christ-like so as to break those chains of debt
and thus artiÞcial performance under mammon. We act satanically till the timeless ÒGodÓ hope-
fully returns at the end of some Þctional, calendar age within the time domain and based on the
zodiac, as it has been for many ages and under many hopefully ÒreturningÓ gods presented by
these controllers. For them, gods are a dime-a-dozen. Except that in their occulted zodiac, there are
actually thirteen gods to return to.

To be absolutely clear, money is debt, always and without exception. The more one acquires with
money the more laws will apply to his person and its property, and thus the more performance will
be expected under a legally consented to threat of duress. One cannot obtain anything in protection
of government without subjection to its laws, for all things acquired through purchase must be
done so using that government’s patented money system. To purchase with money is to purchase
with that which represents debt. And so with every purchase comes a new or continued
performance debt, be it the immediate sales tax paid, the registration required (attachment to name
and insurance), or the later debt of tax burden such as capital gains, property tax, etc. In this way,
the actual thing we call as money is almost insigniÞcant. And so our ardent love of money can only
be considered in Jehovah and under the legal gods as the love of the root of all evil, the love of
artiÞcial things. For to the common man in public persona, all things are valued only in money. The
common man in legal persona may therefore only buy (purchase/conquer) any article legally while
using another’s debt-money currency, for any legal attribute or protections attached to the
registered legal sale of the name and legal title of that which is purchased is what is protected, not
the Reality of which that name re-presents as Þction. In other words, everything (noun) we buy or
sell legally is done so in name only, for we have only the rights of the persons of government, not
of free men under God. Bottom line: the user of money owns nothing in Nature. His purchases
represent nothing but his deeper and deeper willingness to accept Þction over Reality, fakery over
Nature; as the devilmaster’s contracts in zimmah over God’s Design.

This devolution from the Reality of Jehovah as God to the falsity of man as acting vicar of ÒGod,Ó
magistrate, and master over other men and the rest of Nature is the structural epitome of all
governments throughout the world. Without realizing it, that multitude of man acting in
citizenship (those in subjection to the uncontrollable and virtually lawless ÒsovereigntyÓ) are
bound in strawman surety to worship these magistrates as their gods, praying (pleading) to them
while at the same time turning our backs on Nature Itself. When the legal Þction of government is
placed upon a pedestal higher than the Reality of Jehovah, government is thus acting as an
incorporation of the gods (sovereignty). Evil reigns over Good, the artiÞcial over the Real,
ignorance over True Knowledge; as the darkness over the Light. This is the satanic (adversarial)
way, the way of the false light of the societies of lucifer.

—=—

“The State itself is ultimate.


THERE IS NO LAW HIGHER THAN THE STATE. 

And if there’s no law higher than the State,

THEN THERE IS NO APPEAL AGAINST IT.”
—M. Stanton Evans interview

—=—

!427
 —=—

“Sovereignty itself is, of course, NOT SUBJECT TO THE LAW, FOR IT

IS THE AUTHOR AND SOURCE OF LAW.”
—Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 1886

—=—

“The king (sovereignty) CANNOT HAVE AN EQUAL, MUCH LESS A

SUPERIOR.”
—DOMINUS REX NULLUM HABERE POTEST PAREM, MULTO MINUS SUPERIOREM. 1Reeve, Eng. Law, 115. (Black4)

—=—

One cannot appeal (pray) to God’s Nature, Law, and Ultimate Authority if one has taken a false
god (sovereign) and id-entity in and under the contracted dis-ease of law by a sovereign State (and
its church). Either Jehovah is one’s Permanent Sovereign and Master or a middle-man is standing
in the way by contract to his mere temporary empire. Remember, satan, manifesting as anyone or
anything that is opposed to God and Nature, only ever operates in contract.

More importantly, if one is under the legal government (state) of the sovereign People (State), one
cannot also claim simultaneously to be the sovereignty of a State (as part of “We, the People”). One
either is the State (the sovereign People) or one is subject to the private State’s (private sovereign
People’s) commercially created (public) government in a citizen-ship (voluntary slavery) under the
doctrine of principal and agent. The word “State” means in its proper noun a bloodline of “People”
in its recorded posterity (descent, genealogy). Thus, a People have no sovereign but themselves,
and so neither do any of the several States (private/sovereign Peoples).

But let us not forget that this is legal (Þctional) sovereignty placed upon the legal State (People), as
deÞned by the international code of the law of nations. ItÕs simply not Real. We can understand the
deÞnition of this capitalized word ÒStateÓ better by comparing these two maximÕs of law, which
say the exact same thing:

—=—

“The welfare of the PEOPLE is the supreme law.”

—SALUS POPULI SUPREMA LEX. Bac. Max. reg. 12; Broom, Max. 1-10; Montesq. Esprit des Lois, lib. 26, c. 23; 13 Coke, 139; Lingo Lumber Co. v. Hayes,
Tex.Civ.App., 64 S.W.2d 835, 839. (Black4)

—=—

“The welfare of the STATE is the supreme law.”

ÑSALUS REIPUBLICAE SUPREMA LEX. Inhabitants of SpringÞeld v. Connecticut River R. Co., 4 Cush. (Mass.) 71. (Black4)

—=—


This is not mere similitude, but a sameness of terms. Each State is the incorporation of a private
“People” and each private People is a several (foreign/private) State, which bound together
consensually are sometimes called the private united States of America in compact (and in congress
assembled). And that which we call colloquially as “the state” (government) only represents that
private People (States) as its agent.

!428
But the “United States,” a district of Caesar (seizure/piracy), is neither a People nor a State (which
are the same thing), merely a municipal corporation created by those several People (several States)
in a beneÞcial compact (incorporation). These private People (States) are the creators of the “United
States,” are the sovereignty over it and anything under it (including inferior US citizenships), and
thus are not bound by their own created ÒUnited StatesÓ public law. A private People knows and
respects no public authority any more than any king does over his own ofÞce of god, except that
for which it contracts to be under, such as the constituted power of the State (People) of eminent
domain. It is of the utmost importance to commit this fact to memory. And from this point of
reference, as United States citizen-ships (operators of commercial US created persons/statuses), we
may know for certain that we are not one of those private ÒPeople,Ó and that for all intents and
purposes they are the gods of our strawmen. Whether or not we respect the legal, public persona
(strawman) we are granted at birth as the voluntary admixture of names (good and evil) is the
choice that decides who and what our god is. ÒThe PeopleÓ does not actually exist in Nature, being
a plural description and name of a joint-sovereign kingship (artiÞcial person/status), e pluribus
unum (out of many one), and not of any individual man. And so we can say that when taken
together as the private People of each of the several (private) States, also known as the Land-
holders and thus the Land-Lords, these are the gods of the nations, the idols and masters we are
enslaved to as a result of our collective silence. We are ruled by artiÞcial persons (corporations);
laborers in an intricately laid out company store. And yet only through this feigned sovereignty of
the State do they retain such ßattery of title in supposed majesty. Individually, they are powerless.
Their power derives solely through their Þctional body corporate called Òthe PeopleÓ (State), which
is a false, representative god standing legally as only the simulation of themselves as a united,
artiÞcial person.

As a side note, and to clear up the grammatical choices of this author in my selective use of the
capitalization of certain words and terms of Nature and of legal law, the reader should know that a
capitonym is a word that, though spelled exactly the same, changes its meaning and intent when it
is capitalized. Generally, the capitonym (stemming from the word Òcapital,Ó which is the principal
or head of something) changes a noun into a proper noun. Thus while the general and thus more
ambiguous, non-speciÞc word state is a noun/name of a legal Þction, the special, capitalized word
State changes this general word into a proper noun/name of a speciÞc ÒPeople.Ó When words are
capitalized (placed purposefully in capitonym and thus respect of their “proper” authority) they
are special, not general. They are not common. They are not innocent. They are not ambiguous, but
proprietary. But we must also remember that perspective changes our rules. For to the legal realm I
wish only to be known as the ambiguous name clint without any other attachment from that false
realm. To be in permissive possession and respect of the capitalized name Clint Richardson in legal
terminology is symbolic of a proper name, as an incorporated man with public title (a legal, natural
person). And so again we can understand here the power of our choices, the power of our God as
Supreme Creator of Law. Jehovah or manÕs multitude of governmental structures, one of these will
be as our individual God based on our own perspective and respect of Self.

And so, when the preamble of the constitution states that: We, the People, in Order… do Ordain
and Establish this Constitution… for ourselves and our Posterity… these are all capitonyms. These
are special (of a particular species) words/terms of art, given the force of proper nouns/names, and
having only to do with those who were signers (founding fathers/legal creators) and the bloodline
they represented as their agents (attorneys). These are not general terms, meaning that they do not
include everyone, but only a certain and exclusive group of the whole. And so the Posterity of the
People is certainly not the lower, common class of laborers and captured slaves induced and
imported to build their nation and cities (municipal corporations) up for them, either slave or
indenture or modern employee. With this understanding we may proceed with the story, knowing
the difference between what is Real and what is artiÞcial, what is a political government over
common people (the general public) called a state and what is a private or sovereign People also
called a State. But most importantly, we know what are the gods and what Is the only True God.

!429
 —=—


"Posterity: you will never know how much it has cost my generation to
preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it."
—John Quincy Adams

—=—

Do you really think he was speaking on behalf of slaves and indentured foreign immigrants in this
private address to his own bloodline in posterity and inheritance of the sovereign political freedom
he and his kin enjoy? At this point, the answer to this question should start to become clear. For if
all men were included in this label of “Posterity,” then the word posterity itself would be
unnecessary, being historically and in many ways inaccurate.

As foreign, United States citizens only (not the Posterity of private holders of land in any of the
territory of the actual States), the common citizenry only have a permitted, temporary residence in
any of those legal (artiÞcial), state government jurisdictions under that People (State). We are
invited guests, valued as commodities mostly for our ignorance, and secondarily for the labor pool
we represent as managed human capital. For all intents and purposes, we do not exist to them
except as registered chattel, live stock counted by (per) the head (capita). Make no mistake, a United
States citizen-ship is not one of the sovereign People of the several States! Public citizenship is an
employment to the land-holders as it has been from the beginning, through the same types of
colony companies. To think otherwise based on so much indoctrination by public institutions is the
root of all misunderstanding and the basis of this continued voluntary slave system. For we are
peopled (stocked like cattle) as a common, legalized “people,” the goyim of the nation (father) that
suffer from our own collective lack of knowledge under these devil’s contracts. After all, one only
has power and authority over the devil when one is not bound under contract to it. The contract
causes powerlessness, helplessness, hopelessness, and that general feeling of melancholic doom…
because birth into personhood (contractual relationship) is indeed doom (a judgement of spiritual
death). Like cattle, we are peopled (distributed) into plantations called counties (municipal
corporations). Only when the slave can be made to believe he is a master while chained by his own
Þctional self and sig-nature can such a clandestine feudal system of voluntary servitude exist. And
let’s face it, the millions of laws on the books called as “public law” are proof enough of our lack of
private sovereignty. That is, because we are under another People’s law, we are not that People we
pledge our allegiance to. As obvious as this conclusion is, the opposite (adversarial) opinion is put
upon us all from the civil birth of our public person (legal status) to its publicly registered civil
death, and the arrogance and confusion can be cut with a knife. In essence, the general people are
taught that they are the special People. This is a lie.

We have no clue how it is that we are legally plugged-in, and yet we acknowledge the fact at every
turn with every signature and action we take in persona. We feel that we are somehow irreversibly
connected to this Þctional matrix of legal code, and our entire being is redirected, repurposed, and
resourced in order to publicly serve that private People that are the several (private) States in
corporate union as one body politic (sovereignty).

The slaves believe they are part of the ßattering title of ÒWe.Ó

We must pay our publicly ordained taxes. Yet the sovereign (private) man need pay no such tribute
to any master or principal but that for which his bloodline of People privately establish in their
State.

We must register our children, our home, our automobile, and all legal property. Yet the sovereign
man keeps his property private, avoiding such publicity and corruption of blood due to any low
and mean status of public personhood.

!430
We must submit to police. Yet that masonic club and largest street gang in America affronts not
those private men under their public law jurisdiction, instead protecting their own privateering
activities in the organized, legalized crime of asset forfeiture. For the police are a creation of the
private People. “The People” are their gods, the public their captive, patient victims.

It is not our economy, it is theirs. It is not our country, it is theirs. For these are merely the terms of
their own art, and they own these words and their Þctional meanings. And only when the good,
unwitting voluntary or involuntary slave begins to actually realize his place in this status-based
society, to wake up to his own manipulated and simulated self in false patriotism, will he actually
desire and seek to obtain that Natural Freedom he falsely believes he already has even under this
public, voluntarily contracted political indenture and bond of surety. But Þrst he must learn the
Law and acknowledge the Creator of that Law that will keep him Naturally Free and always within
his own Nature. He must Live in the Law, acting only in the Reality of all things, not merely fear
the law and draw license from it in ignorance of its very purpose. In other words, his Law must be
his constant religious action.

Please note again that the word Jehovah is a verb of descriptive Substance, a continuous action of
what Was, Is, and always shall Be in timelessness, in timeless Being, as that which we call the
Natural Realm and the Universe as a never-ending Whole (Oneness). Jehovah is thus the
inescapable time and space, earth and sea, and all that thrives within, without, and because of God’s
continued Permanence of actual Existence (Reality). And this is the only actual, Ultimate,
Permanent Sovereignty, as “God,” which is why no man should ever be respected by any other as
sovereign over any part of God’s Creation, especially over other men. If man’s (the special
People’s) sovereign legal laws are respected above that of Jehovah’s Nature as the Law Itself, then
man is doomed to destroy himself along with that to which his own Þctional law gives him license
to harm, purchase (conquer), and destroy. Only a false, legal foundation can cause this affront upon
Nature (Jehovah) to happen, where certain men are treated as sovereign (law-making gods and
judges) over others. And we are living in that history even as it unfolds. In fact, we are merely the
modern, updated version of their former slaves who built the pyramids and tombs in their honor,
the re-builders of the many masonic temples of Solomon. The facade of the buildings has changed,
but not their intent. And at the top of most of the tallest buildings in every municipal corporation
(city) can be found the name of a bank or insurance agency (artiÞcial persons), as the favored
agents and tributes of the idolized moneychangers in mammon, the greatest agents of Þctional
control over the Real.

Before continuing with this story of the corruption of the conceptualization of God as all Creation
of Nature and Its Creator, we must also come to know ourselves, even as we learn to know our
Þctionally represented ÒselvesÓ as our own worst enemy. When referring to man in this work and
by use of this word, we refer only to the complete package: the mind, body, and soul as a connected
Creation of and harmoniously Living within God (Jehovah) bound to the Laws of Nature. Man is a
general term signifying all men in self-existence and self-evidence without Þctional consideration.
This is the unnamed, non-proper name signifying man’s subservience only to his Creator and to no
other. But what happens when man is devolved in rank in his mind and so referred to as an
ÒindividualÓ Þctional persona of and created by government as opposed to being an undeÞned
(legally unprovable) and uncorrupted Creation of God? Can the legal version of man’s persona
(self) be the same as man in Nature under God? Never! It is very important to know that all
references to any thing as or in person, or as a thing personiÞed, is never a reference to the whole
substantive package of man or any other part of God’s Creation; of what actually Is in Being. A
person is never of Nature, and so we must not respect the reßective but empty surface of that
which is not the Reality of God’s Creation. Man may die staring at the image (art) of food insisting
upon its place in God’s Nature, but the art will always only represent the dead state of Real Life.

A master will call his slave as a “man” just as God would. And so the word “man” is used in this
work only as the root notion of the Source object of GodÕs Creation, and never as the legal Þction
would deÞne it as a subject of legal government or of some false god and master. There is no actual 




!431
Life in Þction. And to this fact there is no exception. Lies are never actual Truths. Man, under God,
is always a Living Creature in Being, and never a person (Þctional legal status). And this presents
the ultimate, always voluntary choice for each to make.

Reality -vs- Þction.

God -vs- the devil.

The word ÒpersonÓ is only ever a reference to the language form of ÒmanÓ in a legal appearance, like
a cartoon in a cartoon world, as the consideration of nothing but his legal status and rank in that
Þctional, legal society; the artiÞcial world of the artiÞcial creators. Thus the word man changes
meanings and becomes not a term of Nature (adjective), but a term of art (noun). The Natural
Existence (verb/adjective) of a man of God is self-evident, but the legal name (noun) of a man must
be proven to positively exist in Þction. Positive (public) law only effects positively (publicly) created
legal things. This artful representation of man by the legal chains of person-hood transmutes the
spiritual meaning of ÒmanÓ into the artful, legal meaning of Òslave.Ó ItÕs all about the name (noun).

Be ultimately aware, therefore, that the legal term Ònatural personÓ is not a reference to anything
within GodÕs Nature and Origin (Source), for legal words can only describe statistically legal
entities as artiÞcial things; as the Òvital statisticsÓ of a legally considered civil life of a civil nature,
but NEVER the Reality of Life and Nature in and of Itself. This term is only a descriptive use of
legal wording that re-presents Nature and Life as a Þctional thing; a cartoon creation of the govern-
ment of men. A ÒpersonÓ is NEVER actually a Living man or part of Nature, only the appearance of
man in a Þctional, statistical form, as the strawman.

Re-genesis. A mirror imageÉ

STATISTIC, STATISTICAL - adjective - [from state or STATIST.] Pertaining to the STATE OF

SOCIETY, the CONDITION of the PEOPLE, THEIR ECONOMY, THEIR PROPERTY AND
RESOURCES. (Webs1828)

VITAL - adjective - [Latin vitalis, from vita, LIFE. This must be a contraction of victa, for vivo
forms vixi, victus; Gr. CONTRACTED.] 1. Pertaining to life, either ANIMAL or vegetable; as
vital energies; vital powers. 2. Contributing to life; necessary to life; as vital air; vital blood. 3.
Containing life. Spirits that live throughout, vital in every part - and vital virtue infus'd, and
vital warmth. 4. Being the seat of life; being that on which life depends. The dart ßew on,
and pierc'd a vital part. 5. Very necessary; highly important; essential. RELIGION IS A
BUSINESS of vital concern. Peace is of vital importance to our country. 6. So disposed as to
live. Pythagoras and Hippocrates afÞrm the birth of the seventh month to be vital [Little used.]
Vital air, pure air or oxygen gas, which is essential to animal life. (Webs1828)

VITAL STATISTICS - The INFORMATION that is kept on BIRTHS, DEATHS,

MARRIAGES, DIVORCES, longevity, etc., that is kept by PUBLIC authorities for
determining PUBLIC utilities, etc. (Black2)

ENROLLMENT - The act of putting upon a roll. A RECORD MADE. In English law. The
REGISTERING or entering on the rolls of chancery, king's bench, common pleas, or
exchequer, or by the clerk of the peace in the records of the quarter sessions, of any lawful act;
AS A RECOGNIZANCE, A DEED OF BARGAIN AND SALE, and the like. (Black4)

—=—

Information, which is given by the ÒinformerÓ (usually the mother) on the birth registration
document, is recreated from those descriptive vital statistics into a legal, Þctional persona. This is
the creation of a legal entity, as the bringing into existence of a Þctional life, a man of straw (words).

!432
How does one reconcile this ridiculous notion that a Þctional thing may have some semblance of
Òlife,Ó when it is so clear and self-evident that no Real or Natural Life Exists in Þctional things? I
suppose we can thank Disney and Warner Bros. for that childish delusion. Amazingly, the whole
story of the scriptural Law is to teach us to not respect such a false existence as this, to respect only
what is self-Existent (Jehovah). And so we must learn to recognize these satanic (adversarial to Life,
Nature, and Reality) versions of artiÞcial life as personiÞcations of legal concepts. The pretended,
acted out life of a citizen-ship, of a legal person (status), is no Life at all. But in the legal realm,
where all things are opposite of Reality and opposed to GodÕs Nature, life is proven to exist there in
its Þctional form without substance through
though the
themagic
magicofofartful
artfulterms:
terms:

—=—

LIFE:

“26. The state of being in force, or THE TERM for which an

INSTRUMENT has LEGAL OPERATION; as the LIFE OF AN
EXECUTION.”
ÑDeÞnition for ÔlifeÕ from: WebsterÕs 1828 Dictionary of the English Language (Webs1828)

—=—

The legal ÒlifeÓ of ÒpersonsÓ of the state is purely a civil (artiÞcial) one, an imaginary legal state of
false being (legal existence), and the respect of the force of the stateÕs (legal creatorÕs) jurisdiction is
that on which legal (Þctional) life depends for its existence. The Òvital statisticsÓ transmuted into
legal persona can never be the Reality of the man operating behind it. A lie cannot be sustained
without belief (love) and respect of its Þctional life (false existence).

Similarity is not sameness. A copy is never and can never be the actual Original. Re-source is never
Source. And a hu-man re-source is not a man of God (True Source).

And so the fundamental difference between the Natural man and these Þctionally considered,
legal, ÒnaturalÓ personas is that while the spiritual man is at Oneness with Nature (he believes in/
loves God), each Þctional creation of personhood is designed to break that harmonious Oneness
and make each man quite unique (novel) and thus patently distinguishable by his registered in-
formation and legal id-entity.

Thus, this word natural as a legal term is speciÞcally and intentionally designed to descriptively
and deÞnitively separate Living man from non-living things in this Þctionally re-created realm, and
to identify (turn the id into a pretended entity) individual men merely by rank and status, but only
in a comparative form when considered next to corporations made up of many natural persons,
which we call a single ÒartiÞcial personÓ (many Ònatural personsÓ incorporated into one artiÞce
called an ÒartiÞcial personÓ or as one Þctional body politic as if it were a single ÒnaturalÓ person).
Corporations are persons too, remember? But the word never has an actual meaning regarding the
substance of Life (Creation) Itself, merely the reßective (evil) appearance of dead form and name
created in and bound to the Þctional realm (hell). Again, legal descriptions from legal words are
only ever a similitude of the Real, which is never a sameness. Thus, the actual vital statistics of a
new-born baby are necessary to create the false but similar persona of that man, the simulated man,
the strawman, from which the birth certiÞcate (matrix) is created as legal evidence of the creation of
a Þnancial instrument of mammon; a legal entity which we call a person.

There is without exception no actual Life in any Þction (in the names of persons, places, or things)
any more than a cartoon character that resembles the form of a man or animal can be called as
Truly ÒLivingÓ in Nature. The word is used to simulate a statistical, imaginary form of life in that

!433
Þctional legal realm, which we call as spiritually dead persons, places, and things (proper nouns).
And so the term natural person is purely descriptive of a life-less legal fact, a Þctional creation of
law, and as such allows no laws or creations of GodÕs Nature into its referential world of word
magic. This is Nature recreated by words (code). The word ÒpersonÓ is not, under any
circumstances, a creation of Jehovah as anything Born by and in Mother Nature, nor is it ever an
actual reference to IT. For if the legal realm acknowledged man as a limitless, unalienable Creation
of God, it would necessarily be required to always acknowledge GodÕs Supremacy of Law as
Higher than itself. In essence then, there would be no need for civil law if moral (foundational) Law
was adhered to and respected. And in Reality, the man never loses this gift and favor of God as a
Creation thereof, but instead voluntarily respects and acts as if he were the Þctional person that
those personal, civil laws are attached to. While wearing the artiÞcial clothing of a legal person-
hood, the man as a self-evident, self-Existent Creation of God is pretending to be invisible to his
True Creator, including his spiritual Duty that Natural Law of God that would otherwise protect
the man from the Þction of his 2nd life in third person.

This is volunteerism. This is the doctrine of master and servant.

The spiritual Law, as the frail man pretending to be the immortal corporation sole of ÒPopeÓ stated
above, is always higher than anything legal (e.g., civil), including all temporal laws and Þctions
created by men. And this is why the churchÕs papal Bull-shit established the pretended and
personiÞed Òspiritual jurisdictionÓ of ecclesiastical law. It would have no power over man if not for
legal personhood, which is the word magic of the mark, name, and number of the legal beast
system. But the absence of all artiÞce, after all, should be our ultimate goal! No more lies! Pure
simplicity of meaning and DutyÉ The names and legal statuses that the State bestows are only
ever anti-Nature, anti-God, anti-christ, and anti-Life. These legal titles in persona are only be-
stowed by magistrates acting as false legal gods, and they re-present man into a pre-judged
(doomed) status, into the impersonation of a slave. From its certiÞed, corporate legal birth to its
certiÞed, corporate legal death, a man is judged only to be as the person (subject and ward) of the
government he re-presents and operates in commerce under, that hood of status created from vital
statistics into a totally controlled legal entity. Jehovah (God) does not Create nor Respect persons,
only men as part of Creation. ÒPersonÓ is and can only ever be a description of the legal, artful form
of man, of what belongs to other men, but is never actually a man. It only applies to a legal existence
(form and appearance) and therefore a legal status (consideration) within the legal realm and
jurisdiction of law. A cartoon; a mirror image; the false appearance of self.

The legal law is not alive (in Nature), and so it cannot consider anything in Nature (GodÕs Creation)
without all things being Þrst named, predeÞned, and redesigned under it as something other than
its Origin and Source. And yet it is constituted and named as the so-called Òliving,Ó ÒorganicÓ law. It
is not a vegetable or fruit, nor a mineral or other aspect of Creation, so we must of course not be
fooled by the use of legal words like ÒorganicÓ when applied to purely Þctional, legal things. This is
yet another term of art. A thing artiÞcial, anything created by man, can never be in Reality (in
Nature) a thing Naturally Organic. This differential in not just meanings of words but in their use
to describe both Reality (God) and Þction (artiÞce/lies) represents the need for the comprehension
of these language arts and the many dualistic terms that magistrates use to control the minds of the
masses. For the words of Nature are also used to deÞne the words of legal Þction, which
purposefully causes a con-fusion of terms. All words have a true sensual meaning. But all words
also have a fabled, parabolic, nonsensical legal meaning. It is this similitude (but certainly not
sameness) of the meanings of words that confuses utterly. For the creator gods of manÕs artiÞcial
systems of art and law (as illusionists) can only create the empty legal names of all things already
Created in Substance under God. All Reality must be made into a Þctional reßection of legal
similitude. And the Real must be subordinated to the art that re-presents it as Þction.

Even the names, images, and empty forms of manÕs re-creation of GodÕs actual Being are respected
above that substance Itself. The verb is personiÞed and thus lost in respect and in consideration
because of the overpowering false-empathy and respect placed upon the false character of the
imaginary noun (name of the person/place/thing).

!434
To personify God (in false image) is to ignore the Substance of Being that is all of God’s Nature.

—=—

“Man (homo) is a term of NATURE; 


Person (persona) of CIVIL LAW.”
—Black’s Law Dictionary, Second Edition (1910). Page 577

—=—

The Creation of Nature turned into a creation of man (law)…

It would be more correct for the author to use the word homo in each instance where the word man
is used in this work. But I have a sneaking suspicion that this would be a vulgar distraction to
many readers due to the slang and immature culture revolved around the use of dog-Latin.
Perhaps this was a purposeful deed by the linguistic masters, keeping us away from the
importance of that True “term of Nature” by twisting its meaning to mean something perversely
sexual. And it should be understood that in the term stramineus homo (straw man), it is the
application of the straw (artiÞce of Þction) that destroys that term of Nature (man), destroying
man’s protective connection to his Creator, causing this mixing of names by that of the legal creator
and placing the man under legal authority. To legally acknowledge having straw instead of blood
as a Þctional character created by the commercial law, no man may act as his own Self. At any rate,
the word man in this work should always be taken in this writing from the Latin translation as
follows and with no artiÞce attached, as purely a Creation in Jehovah. Not as Òhuman beingÓ nor
any other aspect of any artiÞcial form, only as that which is self-evidently and in Self-Existence
man without spot or blemish from the legal Þction. The following legalistic deÞnitions show the
beginning and the end, both of spiritual Life and legal life (spiritual death), the unaffected Natural
and the effected imperfection of man as a corruption of blood, where the word man is legally re-
formed by mere respect of artiÞcial words to mean some class of slave under some sovereign Þction.
The word (term of art) Òslave,Ó or any other description of man is only a ßattering title of the
Þctional person (status) of any man, which under GodÕs Law is not to be respected. When this
word man is spoken in this work, only its Natural substance as God’s Creation is intended, and not
the legal devolution implied by man’s designs against Nature and equitableness.

HOMO - This Latin word, in its most enlarged sense, includes both man and woman. Vide
MAN. (WCA1889)

HOMO - Latin. A MAN; a human being, MALE OR FEMALE; a vassal, or feudal tenant; a
retainer, dependent, or servant. (Black4)

HOMO - Latin. A human being; man, a person. Literally, a creature of the earth — humus; a
person. Derivatives: homage, homicide. (WCA1889)

LIBER HOMO - A free man; also, in Roman law, a freedman. (WCA1889)


LIBER ET LEGALIS HOMO - A free (good) and lawful person: a juror, who was to be
neither a bondsman nor infamous. (WCA1889)

NOVUS HOMO - A NEW MAN; a man PARDONED OF CRIME. (WCA1889)

—=—

When in doubt, considering the various deÞnitions possible for the same word, remember the
parabolic teachings of christ. What you are, your Life, is self-Evident. You areÉ I am. There is no
reason whatsoever to proclaim to anyone in public that you are anything, even that I am “a man.”

!435
This is self-evident. For our purpose in this work, we need only to understand the difference be-
tween a person (persona/mask) and a Real man (homo). A person is never a Real man, but a man is
sometimes acting as a person. Similarly, a “democrat” is never a man, but a man sometimes acts as
a “democrat.” Its just a word, and I am no word. Again, I’m no person, place, or thing. I’m self-evident.

As an example of the simulation of life that is a person-hood, we can again simply consider the
Þctional, animated ÒlifeÓ of a cartoon character. A cartoon is a person (a false personiÞcation and
anthropomorphizing of something in Reality), only able to exist in that cartoon world (realm) on
paper and behind the looking glass, and does not otherwise Exist accept within that representation
in form (jurisdiction) we call entertainment. The word enter-tain-ment in Latin means to enter (enter)
and hold (re-tain) the mind (mentis), and this is what legal law does in its corruption against all of
Nature. For it does not Exist in Nature, only in its own Þctional recreation. It is not a Creation of
God. In order to interact with that cartoon persona, we would need to re-present ourselves as a
Þction and somehow appear in that entertainment jurisdiction (Þctional, legal realm) as a ÒnaturalÓ
cartoon person. Our disposition would, in other words, would need to be in harmony and under
the artiÞce and law that is the nature (source of existence) of that cartoon world (Þction).

But we know this of course to be impossible in Nature. For even virtual reality is and always will
be merely virtual; of the virtue of a lie; artiÞcial; false; art re-presenting Reality through a language
code in a matrix of similitude. Yet we still ask, is pure and utter Þction Real?

Of course, we appear in the realm of legal Þction through the exact same, seemingly impossible
process. We re-present ourselves to magistrate judges (gods) as one of their own (proprietary)
Þctional creations called a legal person in citizen-ship, usually through an attorney (agent) that is
Þrst and foremost an ofÞcer of the court. We appear in court, which is merely part of the house
(principality) of our person’s principal master. What appears in the cartoon realm is natural to that
cartoon realm, just as what appears in the legal realm is natural to and of the virtue of the legal realm,
for these artiÞcial characters are creations of those Þctional realms called Þctions (creations) of law.
But none of these statuses are of the Nature of Jehovah, which knows and respects no such Þction.
At least cartoons have a form that can be seen. Man’s persona is an invisible characteristic never
actually seen, never tangible to the senses.

Let us read this verse again, for it calls out every false ÒChristianÓ in the world, as they who wear
the ßattering title of a Romanized, denominated (renamed) ÒChristianÓ but do not obey the Son
(Law/Word) of God:

—=—

“But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, DECEIVING YOUR
OWN SELVES. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like
unto a man beholding his natural face IN A GLASS: For he beholdeth
himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of
man he was. BUT WHOSO LOOKETH INTO THE PERFECT LAW OF
LIBERTY, AND CONTINUETH THEREIN, HE BEING NOT A
FORGETFUL HEARER, BUT A DOER OF THE WORK, THIS MAN
SHALL BE BLESSED IN HIS DEED. If any man among you seem to be
religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, THIS
MAN'S RELIGION IS VAIN. Pure religion and undeÞled before God and
the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their afßiction,
AND TO KEEP HIMSELF UNSPOTTED FROM THE WORLD.”
—James 1: 22-27, KJB

—=—

!436
To be “unspotted” is descriptive of a state of Life and of the soul that is to be free from censure,
irreproachable, and free from vice. No synthetics (sin) allowed. It is a Pure, non-legal Existence. It is
to appear at all times only as one’s True Self (as Created) and as no other lie and by no other name
(proper noun) and under no other law. To respect persons is to be under the censure of man’s law
and under its added vices, or legal ad-vice.

—=—

MAN:



“…One who is MASTER OF HIS MENTAL POWERS, or who conducts
himself with his usual judgment. When a person has lost his senses, or
acts without his usual judgment, we say, HE IS NOT HIS OWN MAN.”
ÑWebsterÕs 1828 Dictionary, from deÞnition of ÒmanÓ

—=—

Govern-ment (mind control) is not a bad word when it refers to Self-government of one’s own
mind. For all others, for the multitude of forgetful hearers of that Highest Law of Nature, the legal
system and matrix code sits like an invisible Þlter, collecting those who cannot govern themselves.
He who slips through the legal realm without being entrapped is simply he who carries no Þction
or artiÞce and claims no beneÞts or positive protections thereof for any legal persona or ßattering
title. But for he who carries the mark, name, and number of a person under government (false god),
his actions must be subdued and administrated by the controllers (governors) of that satanic
artiÞce. Legal government is the realm of sinners, for sin (syn) is only that which is not of self-
evident Truth. The person of man is a sinner, and man dons that strawman so as to commit sins
against God’s Nature with permission of false gods (magistrates). He who Lives in sin (lives
synthetically) must be governed as a sinner (a person, not a man). This is not merely some religious
drivel, this is the very essence of the two realms of light and darkness, of the Real versus the
artiÞcial, of Nature and all that is opposed to Its self-evident and self-existent Reality. To pretend to
exist outside of what is Real is the nature of the legal, contractual relation-ship. No contract can exist
without a Þctional person to sign and be held responsible for that contract. Thus the Bible teaches
to never make such oaths, to never leave your mark (signature) or respect any such artiÞce.

We do not appear in court as an “unspotted” man (homo), for we cannot. We appear only in and as
a legal status we call the “natural” person or as the title of registered agent (attorney) for that
Þctional persona, for Nature Itself and therefore the Natural Law is generally excluded from any
public legal realm (court). Only the blotted, spotted soul may make such an appearance, as he who is
spotted by worldly, non-spiritual things; the men of straw. We act by agentic virtue of the legal
state, not by the law of God in any actual act (verb) of the True Virtue of Self. Our religion is vain
while acting in person (while our soul is blotted/spotted). We don a spiritually dead person-hood,
a velcro law suit that causes all of the civil code to attach and stick to our re-presented legal
persona.

VIRTUAL - adjective - [See Virtue.] 1. Potential; having the power of ACTING or of

INVISIBLE EFFICACY WITHOUT THE MATERIAL OR SENSIBLE PART. Every kind that
lives, fomented by his virtual power, and warm’d. Neither an actual nor virtual intention of
the mind, but only that which may be gathered from the outward acts. 2. Being in essence or
effect, not in fact; as THE VIRTUAL PRESENCE OF A MAN IN HIS AGENT OR
SUBSTITUTE. (Webs1828)

SUBSTITUTE - verb transitive - [L. substituo; sub and statuo, to set.] TO PUT IN THE PLACE
OF ANOTHER. - noun - ONE PERSON PUT IN THE PLACE OF ANOTHER TO ANSWER
THE SAME PURPOSE. A person may be a substitute WITH FULL POWERS TO ACT FOR

!437
 ANOTHER IN AN OFFICE. REPRESENTATIVES IN LEGISLATION ARE THE
SUBSTITUTES OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS. The orthodox creed of christians is that Christ
dies as the substitute of sinners. 1. ONE THING PUT IN THE PLACE OF ANOTHER. If you
have not one medicine, use another as its substitute. (Webs1828)

HOOD - noun - [Latin fraternitas.]… 4. Any thing to be drawn over the HEAD to cover it. 5.
An ornamental fold that hangs down the back of a graduate to MARK his DEGREE… - verb
transitive - To dress in a hood or cowl; to put on a hood. The friar hooded, and THE
MONARCH CROWNED. 1. TO COVER; TO BLIND. I'll hood my eyes… (Webs1828)

—=—

Nothing under God should be hooded, covered, ignored, or destroyed. Even the ugliest of the
forms of Life in the eye of the beholder should be cherished not for its appearance but for its
purpose and Source. And who among us but these legal gods would dare to declare what is the
purpose and meaning of all other Life? A person-hood is designed to blind man from his own
Truth, and to allow disrespect of the pricelessness of all Life by valuing it only in artiÞce.

A fraternity of any kind, including a legal juristic society, is a hood. A man can only act as a person
(status) under that hood of membership (volunteerism). The beneÞts of any fraternal order,
including that of the education process and university system that is hopelessly intertwined with
the legal state, is false. Virtuality is not sameness with Source. A brother-hood, as a simulation
under contract or unnatural combination (conspiracy/confederation/order), is not a Real brother.
An agent must always have a principal, a slave his master, a debtor its creditor.

If our actions are performed by virtue of governmentÕs personiÞcation of our virtual (Þctional)
political body (under the hood of a legal strawman), then our actions certainly cannot be mistaken
to be in virtue of and in respect to the Laws of God. Legalism is only ever that which is opposed to
GodÕs Nature and Law, and there is nothing Natural about Þction in its re-presented virtual reality.

But always remember that when deÞned by the legal Þction in legalese, the word ÒnaturalÓ takes
on a new meaning in virtue of the art-form it re-presents. Thus, the unnatural becomes the natural,
the Þctional god becomes as the similitude of the God of Nature in its own legally created realm.
The name becomes the named. To a cartoon, a cartoon rock is Ònatural.Ó Perspective is everything.
Thus, to stand in personhood is to be purposefully blind to Jehovah and in anarchy to Its Law. It is
to under-stand not God but only man’s false designs, to live only by accepted lies. It is the lowest
form of existence, but not substantially a Real, spiritual Life in any way.

As spiritual beings to be apparently and in Þnality judged by God as Jehovah, we may only
(literally or Þguratively) go before God the Creator in Pure spiritual Substance, as one of the
Created within Creation, and above all else we must remember the scriptural teaching that God
does not Create or respect (cannot see; will not see) any person in any form. A person has no
substance. It is never of Nature. So we can literally or Þguratively make no excuses before God (the
Permanence and Reality of Being) in Þnal judgement or in looking at ourselves in the mirror by
claiming that our Þctional persons and ßattering titles committed crimes against Nature despite the
fact that we alone acted in that false persona. This is a lame excuse! Almost as lame as the notion of
ignorance used as an excuse in law. It would be as ridiculous as telling your doctor that it was not
you who smoked cigarettes for 30 years, but your Þctional ÒnaturalÓ person that committed the
action, and so the cancer (or if you will, judgement of God) is not your own fault. God sees no
Þctions and no persons, and neither does the disease that is said to be of the virtue of the wrath of
God’s judgement, for these false personas simply do not Exist in that Reality of Nature. Likewise,
the legal, administrative judge presiding over the jurisdiction of its property, the person (status) in
law you carry, will also be judging you as the agent of that person. For the judge is the attorney for
its own principal (god) of his own that artfully created legal persona and ßattering title. His
purpose is only to ensure and insure the protection of that proprietary person (vessel), not the man,
just as a car rental company is only interested in the safety of its property, requiring a contract of

!438
insurance. If a man is harmed while acting in persona then it's the person of he that harmed him that
is charged. In the bond of surety, all of man is judged as if they are Þctional persons, for they
ignorantly appear as such. And so we Þnd that even in this Þctional corporation we call the state
there is no excuse. The devil does not forgive, it only contracts, registers, and records. An agent
cannot blame his vessel (status) for his own actions any more than a car can be blamed for the bad
driving of its operator, for the puppetÕs strings are the noose around the agentÕs neck. The puppet is
only the result of its masterÕs efforts, being in surety for the puppets (persons) actions, just as a man
acting in a police uniform and badge sometimes actually, though not often at all, goes to jail for his
own crimes while acting in agency for a municipal corporation (city, county) as the principal of that
title of policeman (strawman).

Remember, the author is not trying to sell any form of incorporated ÒreligionÓ (noun) here in any
way. This is only the foundation of all Law. Comprehension and brainwashing of religious doctrine
is not necessary. Belief (love) of It, as the acting towards It in all actions as the Law of actions, is the
Law. Under-standing It by Living under It is the only True evocation of Natural Law. It is the
concept, not the strict doctrine, that is necessary. In other words, one who does not actually believe
(vulgarly, with the mind only) that after physical death we will meet our maker can still Live (verb)
by this under-standing as the foundation of Permanent, unshakable Law. This is to say that all men
upon this earth may Þnd True equitableness (Natural harmony) with each other without need of
legal status or judges simply by believing in (loving) the concept that our temporary Lives are only
a small part of the Permanence of Jehovah as the cycle of never-ending Creation, and that as
temporary residents within GodÕs Kingdom of earth we should leave that Creation as Pure and
Natural as we found It, avoiding all harm to all that Exists wherever possible, but especially unto
our fellow Creatures. Hilariously, this is the typical rule of all national parks and campgrounds,
even the ones that government leased out to mining and other corporations with license to destroy.
The rule (doctrine) seems easy enough, and most of us certainly practice this written and unwritten
Law religiously as we visit such protected and respected places of ÒNature.Ó Some of us are so out
of touch with our Creator that we even label ourselves with the ßattering title of naturalist, as if our
origin and Source is someplace other than Nature. Of course, only a Þctional character would need
to publicly identify itself as natural, for it has no self-evidence of this declared legal fact. A True
Naturalist is just a follower of scripture, of the Natural Law, and his modus operandi is proven only
by his actions, not by any ßattery or Þctitious name. I doubt very much that the worship of
ÒJehovahÓ is on most peopleÕs minds when they are simply doing what is right in such instances, in
simply picking up their own litter and un-kindling their own Þre. It feels right, and it is. But when
the question of what is right or wrong becomes challenged by what is a legally declared license, by
what is permissible (by permit) or excusable by some legal artiÞce of manÕs law, it is then that
GodÕs Law of Nature must always be considered towards our course of spiritual (religious) action
(verb), despite what one ÒbelievesÓ in as his religion or non-religion (noun) or what manÕs law
declares as the artiÞcial right of persons. A legal right is not equal to what is Truly Lawful. And in
the legal realm, all crimes against man and Nature have and will be legalized, made and pretended
to be lawful through the word magic of criminal men organized as legal lawmakers.

As for this notion of True christianity as the Law of Nature, nothing is more reasonable or logical;
and believe me, IÕve searched. And what IÕve found is that most and possibly all other ÒideologiesÓ
and systems take their foundations from the Bible before kicking it to the curb without due
diligence and acknowledgement of its virtue of Source. Sadly, just as the pre-Biblical sources of
knowledge and Law (True religion) are also dismissed by most corporate religions, to the point
where they will insist that the earth didnÕt even Exist previous to the history (his-story) of the Bible.
To throw the Bible out with organized religions that claim it for their legal existence is akin to
throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Simply stated, scripture is a sure recipe for the True
Peace and Prosperity of all men on earth. No man need join any legal Þction to accomplish this
peace, for it requires nothing more than to Þnd the inner peace and power of our True Self,
requiring only that we never respect any Þction or lie while simultaneously respecting all of self-
Existent Life. One can only respect Life or non-Life (Þction), never both. God or mammonÉ For
ultimately the respect of that Þction (simulation/representation) kills Real Life in every way
imaginable. It creates spiritually the walking dead.

!439
In the end, man (as magistrate judge) may only forgive the person of man by justifying (making as
law) lame excuses and licenses, for the person is the state’s own creation. Only God can forgive
man, as man Exists only of God’s own Creation, just as only a judge or presidential pardon may
forgive the legal person. The creator controls. The allowance of men to be judged (doomed) by these
artiÞcial judges (gods) is clearly proof that men have and follow no Law (God) above that of men.

—=—

“Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his
brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth
the law: BUT IF THOU JUDGE THE LAW, THOU ART NOT A DOER
OF THE LAW, BUT A JUDGE. THERE IS ONE LAWGIVER, WHO IS
ABLE TO SAVE AND TO DESTROY: WHO ART THOU THAT
JUDGEST ANOTHER?”
—James 4: 11-12, KJB

—=—

“For the INVISIBLE THINGS of him from the creation of the world
ARE CLEARLY SEEN, being understood by the things that are made,
even his eternal power and Godhead; so that THEY ARE WITHOUT
EXCUSE: Because that, when they knew God, they gloriÞed him not as
God, neither were thankful; BUT BECAME VAIN IN THEIR
IMAGINATIONS, AND THEIR FOOLISH HEART WAS DARKENED.
PROFESSING THEMSELVES TO BE WISE, THEY BECAME FOOLS,
AND CHANGED THE GLORY OF THE UNCORRUPTIBLE God INTO
AN IMAGE MADE LIKE TO CORRUPTIBLE MAN, and to birds, and
fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them
up to uncleanness THROUGH THE LUSTS OF THEIR OWN HEARTS,
TO DISHONOUR THEIR OWN BODIES BETWEEN THEMSELVES:
WHO CHANGED THE TRUTH OF GOD INTO A LIE, AND
WORSHIPPED AND SERVED THE CREATURE MORE THAN THE
CREATOR, who is blessed for ever. Amen.”
—Romans 1: 20-25, KJB

—=—

The author wishes to stress the fact that the creator is always god (lord) over its own creation and
self, and this means that the magistrates are the gods over their own creations. This work should
never be misconstrued as suggesting that anyone should worship God as the Creation ITSelf, but
that with Higher spirit must worship Creation as the knowable part of God. When it comes to
Jehovah, any Part is never the sum of or greater than the Whole, and yet no Part is ever to be
considered as any less than the Whole. This is the unwritten reason of the Law of God. The Whole
is the Incorruptible Permanence and Oneness of Being that is Jehovah, of which you and I Am. IT is
One and IT is All but It is Never none (nil). Likewise, the legal system is a closed loop system of

!440
false creation, where terms of art create a coded, Þctional realm, linking all artiÞce into an in-
harmonious (forced) oneness steeped in the corruption of all Truth. It must separate all parts into
proprietary nouns (names) in order to control all parts separately, while at the same time grouping
all those parts into a whole so as to take all private rights away from each individual part. Both of
these, the Real and the art, seek the ruination of the other. Both cause the ruination of whatever
state of Being each man (part) does not choose. One is God (of Nature) and one is the evil (dead)
nature of the cult-ure of satan (the adversaries of the God and Law of our True Nature).

Does this really require the vulgar belief of any man to be Truth, or is it self-evident? We could
worship in some empty ritual the moon, the planets, and the stars, though they are untouchable.
Their design and route is not ours to manage or even alter. We cannot care for them any more than
we can cause them ruination. We are not their Creator. We cannot grow a garden upon them nor
drink from their veins. We may certainly be humbled by this Truth, but to worship them as gods is
to imagine they are not merely a part of Jehovah (self-Existence), attributing to them instead
characteristics of anthropomorphism that cause them to seem larger than Life. But their Reality of
self-Existence does not change merely because we Þctionalize and imagine them to be what they
are not. Our prayers will not alter their course, for their course is part of the whole of Jehovah
(Nature). One simply cannot change the Nature (Source) of anything, for the Nature of anything is
its Law. And we may only Truly respect anything by respecting its Law (Nature). But most
important to consider is that we are simply not grounded to these external parts. We are not
dependent upon them for our sustenance of Life, any more than a toe is dependent upon a Þnger.
We may use them reasonably as navigation and harvesting tools and we may be fascinated by their
sparkle, but they are not under our dominion and care. They do not suffer for our lies and self-
permissions to disrespect their Law (Nature). They remain thankfully safe from our intrusion and
pollution. And while they are of course a part of the Whole, we have in the past (and still today in
some sects) treated them as separate (private) pluralistic gods. But a part is never Truly private.
One need be private only to that which seeks to harm and govern one away from oneÕs own
Nature, from oneÕs Source and Its Law.

This Þne, almost intangible line is the difference between paganism and monotheism. How can we
worship Nature (Creation) in Its self-Existent whole as separate (foreign) from Jehovah (as all that
is in self-Existence as Oneness)? This is oxymoronic! And yet this is the plight of the modernly
indoctrinated corporate ÒChristian,Ó the externalization of the Whole from Its parts. ItÕs like
washing a car on its exterior and imagining that the parts underneath run better because of that
external act, that the appearance is separate from its Source, the image more important than the
Real. Ultimately, when only the parts are worshiped despite the whole, the neglecting or abuse of
the less aesthetically pleasing or valuable parts causes the whole to suffer. The unique, human
disease states in these modern times is a perfect example of this phenomenon, as are the ravished
landscapes from mineral mining and the depleted average oxygen levels from deforestation. And
need I mention war, where parts battle parts because each part identiÞes itself not by its True
Nature (Source) of Life in self-Existence, but as some artiÞcial ethnicity of the various Þctional
nations (ßags/doctrines) of manÕs creation?

As difÞcult as this may seem to comprehend, to speak to any man by his surname in respect of his
Þctional appearance and persona in a legal, jurisdictional form that is adversarial (satanic) to his
True Nature, is to speak evil (artiÞce) of that man. It is to disrespect GodÕs Creation (man) in lieu of
his false show. It is to respect only form without the Substance of Source. It is a rejection of Love,
Peace, Piety, and Charity, for to respect the person is to respect a manÕs worth only in mammon
(commercial valuation). It is to forget that he is but a spiritual brother, a part of the Whole, and to
treat him as external and without the Laws and duties of GodÕs Nature. And so even the action of
calling anyone by their legal name is an act of artful, Þctional judgement (doom). ItÕs simply a
conÞrmed lie. To acknowledge another man as a legal, public entity is to contract with it and
respect its artiÞce of law; to claim that GodÕs Law is not enough. For only dishonest men with
intentions other than what is the negative duty under the Natural Law of God need hide behind
the Þctional protections and sureties of anotherÕs legal name and title, and only those who are not
acting in Truth seek the legal protections of the legal persona (monetary insurance of mammon) in

!441
other men through his cursed (cursive) signature and contract. In other words, only he who acts
without Pure Love and Charity in pursuit of that god of mammon would seek and respect the
surety of a man’s legal persona in contractual relationship instead of recognizing and ensuring only
a Pure, brotherly, spiritual relation and duty. And to personally summon such a demon into court
by employing (using) the power of the gods of the court in principality and magistracy is to dis-
respect the very Nature of God’s Creation and destroy the negative duty and potentiality of
privacy and thus spirituality of any such man. It is to in-jure. To be the force and reason behind the
fact that a man must artiÞcially appear as something he is not is as being the handmaiden of satan.
And the black-robed magistrates count on this utter abandonment of reason and respect of God
and Nature to stay in business. No customers, no extortion; no volunteers (subjects), no masters; no
debtors, no creditors.



Government, and thus any man acting as its agent (attorney), is the ultimate apologist for itself.

LAME - adjective - …2. IMPERFECT; NOT SATISFACTORY; AS A LAME EXCUSE. 3.

Hobbling; not smooth; as numbers in verse. - verb transitive - To make lame; to cripple or
disable; TO RENDER imperfect and unsound; as, to lame an arm or a leg. (Webs1828)

EXCUSE - verb transitive - s as z. [Latin excuso; ex and causor, TO BLAME. See Cause.] 1. To
pardon; to free from the imputation of fault or blame; to acquit of guilt. We excuse a
PERSON IN OUR OWN MINDS, when we acquit him of guilt or blame; or we excuse him by
a declaration of that acquittal. 2. To pardon, as a fault; to FORGIVE ENTIRELY, or to admit
to be little censurable, and to overlook. We excuse a FAULT, which admits of APOLOGY or
extenuation; and we excuse irregular CONDUCT, when extraordinary CIRCUMSTANCES
appear to justify it. 3. TO FREE FROM AN OBLIGATION OR DUTY. I pray thee have me
excused. Luke 14:18. 4. TO REMIT; not to exact; as, to excuse a forfeiture. 5. To pardon; to
admit an apology for. Excuse some courtly strains. 6. To throw off an imputation by apology.
Think you that we excuse ourselves to you? 2 Corinthians 12:19. 7. TO JUSTIFY; to vindicate.
Their thoughts accusing or else excusing one another. Romans 2:1. - noun - A plea offered in
extenuation of a fault or irregular deportment; apology. Every man has an excuse to offer for
his neglect of duty; THE DEBTOR MAKES EXCUSES FOR DELAY OF PAYMENT. 1. The
act of excusing or apologizing. 2. That which excuses; that which extenuates or justiÞes a
fault. His inability to comply with the request must be his excuse. (Webs1828)

—=—

Now let us look at the Bible as the quite imperfect work (as the words of men) it is today, translated
and re-transliterated by men of different hue and color of law and of religious doctrine, to the point
that it is somehow socially accepted that each version is somehow also the same in its mere
similitude to the Source and Origin of ancient texts and especially language arts. Some may also
need an apology for the Þgurative and metaphoric nature of the Bible, believing that a parable
cannot be taken as a Truism. And though so many classic fables and parables are accepted in our
culture as the popular and even sometimes ofÞcial allegories of moral teachings, for some reason
the “literalist,” historical view of the Bible cannot be shaken. So let us consider the meaning of
these words before we make such hasty judgements of the Bible and other parabolic teachings. For
some may even consider this work of mine as some apologist form of discourse on God. And this
would not offend me at all as long as the apology is accepted in the spirit it is intended, for the
shortcomings of the scriptures are not God’s mistakes, only the folly of man trying to describe that
which he cannot know and yet which also rings as self-evident despite his empty words!

Apologies, with the exception of what are purely innocent accidents, it seems, are never required
for anything but purposefully misused, misapplied, mistaken, and misunderstood words. And
what is the modern Bible made of if not the artful words of man, of kings and of scribes and of
attorneys?

!442
APOLOGY - noun - [Gr. discourse.] AN EXCUSE; something said or written in defense or
extenuation of WHAT APPEARS to others WRONG, OR UNJUSTIFIABLE; or of what may
be liable to disapprobation. It may be an extenuation of what is not perfectly justiÞable, or a
vindication of what is or may be disapproved, BUT WHICH THE APOLOGIST DEEMS TO
BE RIGHT. A man makes an apology for not fulÞlling an engagement, OR FOR
PUBLISHING A PAMPHLET. An apology then is a reason or reasons assigned for what is
wrong or may APPEAR to be wrong, and it may be either an extenuation or a justiÞcation of
something that is or may be CENSURED, BY THOSE WHO ARE NOT ACQUAINTED
WITH THE REASONS. (Webs1828)

APOLOGIZE - verb intransitive - TO LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR A FUTURE OFFENSE.

(The Devil’s Dictionary, by Ambrose Bierce, 1911)

APOLOGETIC - adjective - [Gr. to speak in defense of; and speech.] Defending by words or
arguments; EXCUSING; said or written IN DEFENSE, or by way of apology; as an
apologetic essay. (Webs1828)

APOLOGIST - noun - [See Apology.] One who makes an apology; ONE WHO SPEAKS OR
WRITES IN DEFENSE OF ANOTHER. (Webs1828)

APOLOGUE - noun - ap’olog. [Gr. a long speech, a FABLE.] A moral FABLE; a story or
relation of FICTITIOUS EVENTS, intended to convey USEFUL TRUTHS. AN APOLOGUE
DIFFERS FROM A PARABLE IN THIS; THE PARABLE IS DRAWN FROM EVENTS
WHICH PASS AMONG MANKIND, AND IS THEREFORE SUPPORTED BY
PROBABILITY; AN APOLOGUE MAY BE FOUNDED ON SUPPOSED ACTIONS OF
BRUTES OR INANIMATE THINGS, and therefore DOES NOT REQUIRE TO BE
SUPPORTED BY PROBABILITY. Esop's fables are good examples of apologues. (Webs1828)

PROBABILITY - noun - [Latin probabilitas. See Probable.] 1. LIKELIHOOD; appearance of

truth; that state of a case or question of fact which results from superior evidence or
preponderation of argument on one side, inclining the mind to receive it as the truth, but
leaving some room for doubt. IT THEREFORE FALLS SHORT OF MORAL CERTAINTY,
BUT PRODUCES WHAT IS CALLED OPINION. Probability is the appearance of the
agreement or disagreement of two ideas, by the intervention of PROOFS WHOSE
CONNECTION IS NOT CONSTANT, BUT APPEARS FOR THE MOST PART TO BE SO.
DEMONSTRATION PRODUCES SCIENCE OR CERTAIN KNOWLEDGE; PROOF
PRODUCES BELIEF, AND PROBABILITY OPINION. 1. Any thing that has the
APPEARANCE of REALITY OR TRUTH. In this sense, the word admits of the plural
number. THE WHOLE LIKE OF MAN IS A PERPETUAL COMPARISON OF EVIDENCE
AND BALANCING OF PROBABILITIES. (Webs1828)

PROBABLE - adjective - [Latin probabilis, from probo, to prove. See Prove.] 1. LIKELY; HAVING
MORE EVIDENCE THAN THE CONTRARY, or evidence which INCLINES THE MIND
TO BELIEF, but leaves some room for doubt. That is accounted probable which has better
arguments producible for it than can be brought against it. I do not say that the principles of
religion are merely probable; I have before asserted them TO BE MORALLY CERTAIN. 2.
THAT RENDERS SOMETHING PROBABLE; as probable evidence, or probable
presumption. 3. That may be proved. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

PROBE - noun - [Latin probo.]… - verb transitive - 1. To search to the bottom; to scrutinize; to
examine thoroughly into CAUSES AND CIRCUMSTANCES. (Webs1828)

ABLE - adjective - a’bl. [Latin habitis] 1. Having physical power sufÞcient; having competent
power or strength, BODILY OR MENTAL; as a man able to perform military service - A
CHILD IS NOT ABLE TO REASON on abstract subjects. 2. Having strong or unusual
powers of mind, or intellectual qualiÞcations; as an able minister. Provide out of all Israel

!443
able men. Exodus 18:18. 3. HAVING LARGE OR COMPETENT PROPERTY; OR SIMPLY
HAVE PROPERTY, OR MEANS. Every man shall give as he is able. Deuteronomy 16:17. 4.
Having competent strength or fortitude. He is not able to sustain such pain or afßiction. 5.
Having sufÞcient knowledge or skill. He is able to speak French. She is not able to play on the
piano. 6. HAVING COMPETENT MORAL POWER OR QUALIFICATIONS. AN
ILLEGITIMATE SON IS NOT ABLE TO TAKE BY INHERITANCE. (Webs1828)

PROVABLE - adjective - [See Prove.] That may be proved. (Webs1828)

DEMONSTRATION - noun - 1. The act of demonstrating, or of exhibiting certain proof. 2.

The highest degree of evidence; certain proof exhibited, or such proof as establishes a fact or
proposition beyond a possibility of doubt, or as shows the contrary position to be absurd or
impossible. 3. Indubitable evidence of the senses, or of reason; evidence which satisÞes the
mind of the certainty of a fact or proposition. THUS WE HOLD THAT THE WORKS OF
NATURE EXHIBIT DEMONSTRATION OF THE EXISTENCE OF A GOD. 4. In logic, a
series of syllogisms, all whose premises are either DEFINITIONS, SELF-EVIDENT
TRUTHS, or propositions already established. 5. Show; exhibition. 6. In anatomy, the
exhibition of parts dissected. (Webs1828)

SYLLOGISM - noun - [Latin syllogismus; Gr. with, and to speak; to think.] A form or
reasoning or argument, consisting of three propositions, of which the two Þrst are called the
premises, and the last the conclusion. In this argument, THE CONCLUSION
NECESSARILY FOLLOWS FROM THE PREMISES; so that if the two Þrst propositions are
true, the conclusion must be true, AND THE ARGUMENT AMOUNTS TO
DEMONSTRATION. Thus; a plant has not the power of locomotion; An oak is a plant;
Therefore an oak has not the power of locomotion. These propositions are denominated the
major, the minor, and the conclusion. (Webs1828)

FABLE - noun - [Latin, Gr. The radical sense is that which is spoken or told.] 1. A feigned
story or tale, intended to instruct or amuse; a Þctitious narration INTENDED TO ENFORCE
SOME USEFUL TRUTH OR PRECEPT. Jothams fable of the trees is the oldest extant, and as
beautiful as any made since. 2. FICTION IN GENERAL; as, the story is all a fable. 3. An idle
story; vicious or vulgar Þctions. But refuse profane and old wives fables. 1 Timothy 4:7. 4. The
plot, or connected series of events, in an epic or dramatic poem. THE MORAL IS THE
FIRST BUSINESS OF THE POET; this being formed, he contrives such a design or fable AS
MAY BE MOST SUITABLE TO THE MORAL. 5. FALSEHOOD; a softer term for A LIE. -
verb intransitive - 1. To feign; TO WRITE FICTION. Vain now the tales which fabling poets
tell. 2. To tell falsehoods; as, he fables not. - verb transitive - To feign; TO INVENT; TO
DEVISE AND SPEAK OF, AS TRUE OR REAL. THE HELL THOU FABLEST. (Webs1828)

PARABLE - noun - [Latin parabilis.] Easily procured. [Not used.] [Latin parabola; Gr. to throw
forward or against, to compare to or against; as in confero, collatum, to set together, or one
thing with another.] A FABLE OR ALLEGORICAL RELATION OR REPRESENTATION OF
SOMETHING REAL IN LIFE OR NATURE, FROM WHICH A MORAL IS DRAWN FOR
INSTRUCTION; such as the parable of the trees choosing a king, Judges 9:1; the parable of the
poor man and his lamb, 2 Samuel 12:1; the parable of the ten virgins, Matthew 25:1. - verb
transitive - TO REPRESENT BY FICTION OR FABLE. (Webs1828)

PAR - noun - [Latin par EQUAL, paro.] 1. State of equality; EQUAL VALUE; equivalence
without discount or premium. Bills of exchange are at par above par or below par. Bills are at
par when they are sold at their nominal amount for coin or its equivalent. 2. EQUALITY IN
CONDITION. (Webs1828)

PARABOLIC, PARABOLICAL - adjective - EXPRESSED BY PARABLE OR ALLEGORICAL

REPRESENTATION; AS PARABOLICAL INSTRUCTION or description. 1. [From parabola.]
Having the form of a parabola; as a parabolic curve. (Webs1828)

!444
 ALLEGORY - noun - [Gr. other, to speak, a forum, an oration.] A FIGURATIVE sentence or
discourse, in which THE PRINCIPAL SUBJECT IS DESCRIBED BY ANOTHER SUBJECT
RESEMBLING IT in its properties and circumstances. THE PRINCIPAL SUBJECT IS THUS
KEPT OUT OF VIEW, AND WE ARE LEFT TO COLLECT THE INTENTIONS OF THE
WRITER OR SPEAKER, BY THE RESEMBLANCE OF THE SECONDARY TO THE
PRIMARY SUBJECT. Allegory is in words that hieroglyphics are in painting. WE HAVE A
FINE EXAMPLE OF AN ALLEGORY IN THE EIGHTIETH PSALM, in which God's chosen
people are represented by a vineyard. The distinction in scripture between a parable and an
allegory is said to be that A PARABLE IS A SUPPOSED HISTORY, AND AN ALLEGORY A
FIGURATIVE DESCRIPTION OF REAL FACTS. An allegory is called A CONTINUED
METAPHOR. The following line in Virgil is an example of an allegory: Claudite jam rivos, pueri,
sat prata biberunt. ÒStop the currents, young men, the meadows have drank sufÞciently; that is
let your music cease, our ears have been sufÞciently delighted.Ó (Webs1828)

DRAMA - noun - [Gr., to make.] A poem or composition representing a picture of human

life, and accommodated to action. The principal species of the drama are tragedy and comedy;
inferior species are tragi-comedy, opera, etc. (Webs1828)

METAPHOR - noun - [Gr. to transfer, over, TO CARRY.] A short SIMILITUDE; a similitude

reduced to a single word; or a word expressing similitude without the signs of comparison.
Thus 'that man is a fox, ' is a metaphor; but 'that man is like a fox, ' is a similitude or
comparison. So when I say, 'the soldiers fought like lions, ' I use a similitude. In metaphor the
similitude is CONTAINED IN THE NAME; a man is a fox, means, a man is as crafty as a fox.
So we say, a man bridles his anger, that is, restrains it as a bridle restrains a horse. Beauty
awakens love or tender passions; opposition Þres courage. (Webs1828)

APHORISM - noun - [Gr. determination, distinction; from to separate.] A MAXIM; a precept,

or PRINCIPLE expressed in few words; a detached sentence containing some important
truth; as, the aphorisms of Hippocrates, or of the civil law. (Webs1828)

—=—

What is like is not the same; for nothing similar is the same…

The story of christ is the allegory of Jehovah, told in the perspective of man’s place in God’s
Creation, and designed to establish aphorisms as maxims of the Highest Moral Law for man to
follow. Jesus christ, therefore, is a living metaphor of Jehovah. Thus we ask not what would ÒGodÓ
do but what would ÒJesusÓ do, for it is much easier to relate to the persona and story of a man as
an allegoric story of Law as GodÕs Creation than to All that our unfathomable and omnipotent God
(Source of Life) Is. This is called as personiÞcation, as used in many, many historical works. For
some this statement is irrationally taken to be offensive, for others it may be used as a justiÞcation
of their unwarranted hatred for the Bible. For the empty form and artful images of these Biblical
characters are made by the corporate church to be more important than the message and substance
of knowledge they are meant to present by the words of wise men, as the genealogy of the
ÒgenerationsÓ presented as more important than the Law being established. And yet these
arguments over historical ÒfactsÓ in some imagined timeline support neither side of this ridiculous
argument as compared to the legitimacy of the Bible scriptures as ancient knowledge and the
timeless foundation of the Law of GodÕs Nature.

So what can be uniformly said of the Bible with regard to the above deÞnitions of words?

Here is were we must bring reason into the equation, and focus again on the self-evidence of what
is stated therein while acknowledging that God is the very epitome of that which Exists only in
self-evidence (the unfettered, unchallenged, unchanging harmony of Reality). Is the Bible a same-
ness or a similitude? Is one part of the story a metaphor and another an aphorism and yet another a
parable while some other part stands as a fable? Is Jesus speaking parabolically or in continuous

!445
metaphorical allegory? Is Jesus himself purely an allegorical character (as the representation and
Þctional personiÞcation of God), or is his likeness a Real part of history, even though it is told by
ÒwitnessesÓ in third party ÒbooksÓ sometimes 100s of years after his supposed life in the timeline of
manÕs history? Is fable a bad word? Is a lie always a wrong? Is there really such a thing as a bad
word, or just a wrongly respected and applied one? More importantly, is a fable and a parable the
same concept?

Amazingly, the Bible answers these questions as it always does, though through the KingÕs
transliterations these answers are often hidden in plain sight. It certainly warns against what has
already happened in our modern generations (age). This parabolic warning is based upon the
notion of fable, of turning away from the self-evidence of the Word of God in any language and
embracing, as so many have today, the doctrines of men and religions with no substance, no Truth.

—=—

“For the time will come WHEN THEY WILL NOT ENDURE SOUND
DOCTRINE; BUT AFTER THEIR OWN LUSTS SHALL THEY HEAP
TO THEMSELVES TEACHERS, having itching ears; AND THEY
SHALL TURN AWAY THEIR EARS FROM THE TRUTH, AND SHALL
BE TURNED UNTO FABLES. But watch thou in all things, endure
afßictions, do the work of an evangelist, MAKE FULL PROOF OF THY
MINISTRY.”
—2 Timothy 4: 3-5, KJB

—=—

We must never forget the most important reason for all actions, which is INTENT. For even the
Bible may be twisted and turned by unscrupulous men into a simulated (but not the same) fable to
satisfy their own evil intentions, and even to justify those wrongful actions. But under no reason
should the Bible or ÒGodÓ (nouns/empty names) for that matter be used as an excuse for anything
except for following the Highest Law against all other artful indoctrinations of law. To act without
(outside of) the Truth is not reasonable and not justiÞable.

It is my own fear, mind you a good and proper fear to have of GodÕs Word, that my words here will
be mistaken as those of these false teachers, that my examinations will be thought as subversive.
And yet I realize that my subversiveness is only being expressed towards exactly what is written
above, as compared to the corrupted church and state. I realize that what I have accumulated
herein is the anti-fable, the opposition to all fabled institutions and genealogies that have caused
such blind belief and dark leadership, causing us all to travel down the most arduous and
dangerous path imaginable under these false gods of mammon. And this belief (love) in false
things and authorities seems to be causing a self-fulÞlling prophecy that will lead us all into the
very beast system described obtusely in the King James translations. We are being used (employed)
in all manner of employments to build that system of art (technology) that has already begun our
descent into madness and artful captivity. We are building such a legal matrix that most will never
even contemplate choice, and the power of the parable will be lost upon such tainted minds as
these. For a parable is useless without the power to choose the moral, spiritual path away from
Þction. And the beast system, the legal matrix combined with such advanced technology (art) is
being designed to insert the strawman directly into the mind and body, causing an unescapable
causality where moral choice is impossible. For the strawman will soon require a connection to the
AI, and without such an interface the man will not be able to Live, for his connection to Source has
been tainted. His own parts will be artiÞcial, trans-human, and even the property of another, be-
cause he did not treat his body as the Temple of God as scripturally instructed, instead deÞling it

!446
with technology (art) and synthetic creations (sins) of man. He will attempt to be some thing he is
not, some thing that Nature cannot support. For he will not be able to buy, sell, or trade without
such an interface, without the mark of his beast-hood. Man’s person will be able to be switched on
and then off again, his artiÞcial life erased due to non-compliance to those devilmaster’s law.

One’s “ministry” cannot be merely words, as only judgements without example. Like the Word of
God, our ministry must be shared through our own visible actions, for the Word is the Law and the
Son we must at all times follow. We must become the sons of God, the example to follow, for the
Son is the Word and christ’s return may only happen within each of us. To this end, we must be
reborn back into God’s Nature.

To do this we must again understand the importance of parabolic speech, and be able to
differentiate it from what a fable is. To speak self-evident Truth in parable form is the Highest
formative substance of expression, and the very reason for its use by christ. We must speak in
wholly undeniable terms, never allowing the artiÞce to penetrate our perceptions of Reality, while
at the same time remaining grounded in our parabolic tales even when we may personify or
anthropomorphize things or concepts for knowledge sake.

To be clear, the word parable (Strong’s H4912 - mashal) appears 49 times in 49 verses in the Bible. It
carries the meaning of parable, proverb, byword, and like. But in its root form this word marshal
has a very interesting meaning. For it also takes the deÞnition of ÒTo make anything into the
likeness of another.” Sounds like photo-Genesis to me, like the creation story, the recreation of
Reality into Þction. But what is this word really and why is it used to describe this allegorical
knowledge put forth in these scriptural stories, that it should be Supreme and without other
doctrine?

Strong's H4912 - mashal - îÈùÈÑì:

This same word is used 81 times in scriptures and is translated as the following words:
rule (38x), ruler (19x), reign (8x), dominion (7x), governor (4x), ruled over (2x), power (2x),
indeed (1x).

1. To rule, have dominion, reign

A. (Qal) to rule, have dominion
B. (Hiphil)
1. to cause to rule 

2. to exercise dominion

And from Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon for mashal:

“To make like, TO ASSIMILATE. See… the noun similitude, parable, etc. To put forth a
parable, TO USE A PROVERB, to sing a song of derision. (2) To rule, to have dominion,
followed by the thing ruled over (Genesis 3:16)… to have the power of doing anything, as in
Isa. 40:10, “his arm ruleth for him.” Sometimes to be over anything, lords, rulers, princes, and
in a bad sense tyrants. Learned men have made many attempts to reconcile the signiÞcations
of making like, and ruling… however I have no doubt but that from the signiÞcation of
making like, is derived that of JUDGING, forming an opinion (i.e. to think, to suppose, to
think Þt), which is nearly allied to the notion of GIVING SENTENCE, ORDERING,
RULING… This notion of ruling, which is not found in this root in the other Phoenicio-
Shemitic languages [except the Pheonician] seems to have passed over to the Greek… has no
root in that language. Niphal, properly, to be compared; sense TO BE LIKE ANY THING. Piel,
to use parables. Hiphil, (1) to compare. (2) to cause to rule, to give dominion. Hithpael, to
become like…”

—=—

!447
Simply stated, the parables of christ are designed to assimilate all men to His example, to cause
men to follow in christ’s footsteps under God’s Law (Word).

That our actions might be governed by scripture, parabolic tales are told to us so that we may judge
our own actions before we commit to them. They are, in other words, a way to examine the
consequences of all things by applying self-evident Truths so as to equate the outcome of every-
thing we may do. And by speaking them to others, we are able to relay the Word of God, the self-
evidence of the Truth and of the Natural Law and Its Design, without speciÞc judgement. In other
words, we may save either someone or our Selves from the danger and the lies of future actions.

In this way, an ambiguous parable is the opposite of strict legal advice. It comes from the clear
heart and the spirit in Love and Charity, whereas legal advice comes from an attorney re-presenting
the courts and its magistrates of the state. Advice may only be administrative, whereas the parable
is designed to cause avoidance of all legal (artiÞcial) paths into Þction. Legal advice, no matter how
good, is always a lie, while a parable well told and with Loving intent is always a self-evident
Truth. Advice intends an anti-choice towards spiritual death, while the parable intends a choice
bound to Real Life and Its Natural Law. For advice may only be given to persons having civil life.
Legal ad-vice is designed to take away moral choice. And legal advice is never and cannot ever be
directed towards God’s Nature and Law.

Here we Þnd that these scriptural parables are told with the intent of being as the Highest
Authority of Law (the Word), as a realm of Authoritative Dominion over man’s conscious actions.
The fabled characters of the Bible who speak these parables, including christ Himself, are not the
point of the parable. Christ teaches the Law of Jehovah, not “Christianity.” His teachings in
parabolic format are the self-evident Word of God, told in allegoric story form so that we may
ourselves always relate to the story and know that the story applies to all men who might partake
in the foolishness being displayed parabolically within. In other words, by showing the Law of
God in story form as allegorical tales of the potential of manÕs certain folly in personiÞcation of
what most certainly will happen in the future, the Law may be not only learned from but the
exampled consequences known as well without actually breaking or transgressing that Law. Thus
we may experientially know through such ancient wisdom and moral-establishing story-telling the
effect we may cause upon ourselves and others by our own foolishness and ignorance before it
happens. It is just as many ancient tribes passing wisdom down from generation to generation
through fabled tales and stories. This is the purpose of allegory and of the parable, and more to the
point the purpose of telling moral stories in the personiÞcation of any and every manÕs potentiality,
so as to cause not only an intimate and remote knowledge of the Law but also the instilled fear of
breaking God’s Word (Nature’s Law). The parable opens in the mind two possible paths, so that
even the dark path is alight with knowledge, the knowledge of good and evil. The intent is (or
should be) always to Godliness, to cause the hearer to walk as christ would, and so to simply and
vulgarly call these characters and stories as a lie (fables) is to totally miss the intended Spirit of the
stories. And this, of course, applies to all Þctional stories and histories, science Þctions, and fairy
tales ever created. Intent is everything. And while it is easy to pretend the Bible is of bad intent to
satisfy our own lusts, its self-evidence is only able to be defeated by artiÞce (lies), by legal means
and licensure against God’s Word; the very intent of this legal system as that which is adversarial
to Truth. To prove anything legally (positively) is to deny the Truth of that which is self-Existent
and self-evident. Nature has no place in this Þction, for this legal system is a conÞrmed and
ratiÞed, amoral fable. God cannot ever be proven or disproven, for we can never prove or disprove
a negative, or what is self-existence. Strangely, only lies (words) can be proven to exist, for proof is
always a legal conception, and legality is always made up of only the words of men. Science proves
at best what already Exists, and so it proves nothing at all that isn’t already self-Existent. For as the
scriptures warn against man’s tirelessly entrenched ego, there is nothing new under the sun. Science,
in other words, is never Creation. Truth requires no proofs of men.

Legal Þction is very much opposed to God. Its intent is strictly to cause discord with Nature, to
separate man from his Source into the voluntary slave-state of agency in some system of mammon.
This is undeniable. And its adversarial and subversive intention effects greatly our current state of

!448
Being and destroys our connection to our True Self and to Reality Itself, the Reality of Nature being
called as “God” or “Jehovah.” Yes, parabolically we could state that the Supreme Being can simply
and monotheistically be said to be Nature’s Self! Our idea of God is best explained as the worship
of the personiÞcation of Nature, of Creation, as the Creator; the individual anthropomorphism of All
that Is in self-Existence, as the ultimate verb of Being, Jehovah. How else may one possibly worship
or even speak or tell stories about God as a verb while at the same time obtaining and keeping the
wisdom of Its Nature and Law? No story has a verb as its character. There is no story about the
verb or adjective good, only a story of good personiÞed or anthropomorphized into the name of a
character that acts as good. The answer is simple, as simple as the reasoning behind the christian
name of men, which is a design to acknowledge one’s state of Pure self-Existent Being in Jehovah
without somehow legally in-juring or Þctionalizing oneÕs True Being (verb). It is a recognition of
oneÕs part of and in Jehovah without idolizing the Self into a proprietary noun (surname) without
substance. And so we call as Jehovah (I Am) what we must learn to call all things Real, without
time or valuation (price), and only as the verbalizing of Its True state of Being (verb) in Jehovah.
For all things Real are only ever I Am. I Exist only in and of my True Self. And so from all men is
needed the duty of the Law of the God of Existence to Be and co-Exist in harmony with Nature.

Most importantly, there is a sense of choice here as we are constantly set out to compare Reality
with its similar, fabled form in Þction. This is a difÞcult task when someone re-presents themselves
as say a king or pope, dressing ceremonially in that Þctional part, making it hard to not respect the
false persona and title being pretended. Yet I can only imagine or at least hope that the actual
Reality of such a lamed and fragile man is still recognized as the source of such Þction. It is to this
task of comparison that we live our altered lives, constantly judging all men by their presented titles
and cloth, and always willing to bow to a higher Þction than our own persona, which ultimately
only means bowing to a lesser god than our own Truth.

When we follow this word compare in its origin and etymology we discover a very interesting
word-path to follow, one which truly explains what the Bible exclaims when it tells us to not
respect these fabled genealogies of the “royal” bloodlines that rule over the nations in privy
(privacy). Amazingly, this notion of recording the history of descent is literally a parable, a
simulation of false authority based solely on family relation by blood. To read genealogical records
is literally to respect history as the reason for the power and sovereignty (lawlessness) of current
and future kings and other magistrate gods. It is the comparison of the Þctional title of the fathers
and mothers with the actual Life of the man that will inherit said title in that genealogical parable
called as family history. This is not at all what my own prior misconceptions of this word parable
were, but I can now understand that the parables of christ are to be taken as the Word of God from
the Son (personiÞed Word) of God as the self-evident Rule of Law. Only the parables of men in
high places, told to enrich themselves and justify their own false existence in power and wealth, are
to be admonished. For they are not wise in what is self-evident, but only in the ways of corruption
and in their own artfully created history (his story).

The lessons learned from the book of Proverbs and from other scriptural parables are the Words of
that Þnal Authority. But come let us see for ourselves how genealogy is also merely a parabolic tail
of the personiÞed, self-entitled godsÉ

COM - In composition as a preÞx denotes with, to or against. (Webs1828)

PARE - verb transitive - [Latin paro; Gr. LAME; TO MUTILATE; Heb. TO CREATE; to cut off.
The primary sense is to thrust or drive, hence to drive off, to separate, TO STOP BY
SETTING or repelling, as in parry, or to drive off or out, as in separating or producing.] 1. To
cut off, as the superÞcial substance or extremities of a thing; to shave off with a sharp
instrument; as, to pare an apple or an orange; to pare the nails; to pare a horse's hoof; to pare
land in agriculture. 2. TO DIMINISH BY LITTLE AND LITTLE. The king began to pare a
little the privilege of clergy. When pare is followed by the thing diminished, the noun is in the
objective case; as, to pare the nails. When the thing separated is the object, pare is followed by
off or away; as, to pare off the rind of fruit; to pare away redundancies. (Webs1828)

!449
LIKENED - participle passive - COMPARED. (Webs1828)

COMPARED - participle passive - SET TOGETHER AND EXAMINED WITH RESPECT TO

LIKENESS OR UNLIKENESS, AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT; LIKENED;
REPRESENTED AS SIMILAR. (Webs1828)

COMPARE - verb transitive - 1. To set or bring things together IN FACT OR IN

CONTEMPLATION, AND TO EXAMINE THE RELATIONS THEY BEAR TO EACH
OTHER, with a view to ascertain their agreement or disagreement; as, to compare two pieces
of cloth, two tables, or coins; to compare reasons and arguments; to compare pleasure with
pain. In comparing MOVABLE THINGS, it is customary to BRING THEM TOGETHER, for
examination. In comparing things immovable or remote, and abstract ideas, we bring them
together in the mind, as far as we are able, and consider them in connection. COMPARISON
THEREFORE IS REALLY COLLATION, or it includes it. 2. TO LIKEN; TO REPRESENT AS
SIMILAR, for the purpose of illustration. Solon compared the people to the sea, and orators
and counselors to the winds; for that the sea would be calm and quiet, it the winds did not
trouble it. In this sense compare is followed by to. 3. To examine the relations of things to
each other, with a view to discover their relative proportions, quantities or qualities; as, to
compare two kingdoms, or two mountains with each other; to compare the number ten with
Þfteen; to compare ice with crystal; to compare a clown with a dancing master or a dandy. In
this sense compare is followed by with. 4. In grammar, TO FORM AN ADJECTIVE in the
degrees of comparison; as blackish, black, blacker, blackest. 5. To get; to procure; to obtain; as
in Latin. - verb intransitive - 1. To hold comparison; TO BE LIKE OR EQUAL. 2. SIMILE;
SIMILITUDE; ILLUSTRATION BY COMPARISON. [This noun is in use, but cannot be
considered as elegant.] (Webs1828)

ILLUSTRATION - noun - The act of RENDERING bright or GLORIOUS. 1.

EXPLANATION; elucidation; a RENDERING CLEAR what is obscure or abstruse.
(Webs1828)

ILLUSTRIOUS - adjective - [Latin illustris.] 1. Conspicuous; distinguished by the

REPUTATION of greatness; RENOWNED; EMINENT; AS AN ILLUSTRIOUS GENERAL
OR MAGISTRATE; an illustrious prince. 2. Conspicuous; renowned; conferring honor; as
illustrious actions. 3. Glorious; as an illustrious display of the divine perfections. 4. A TITLE
OF HONOR. (Webs1828)

COLLATION - noun - 1. The act of bringing or laying together, and comparing; A

COMPARISON OF ONE COPY OR THING OF A LIKE KIND WITH ANOTHER. 2. The act
of conferring or bestowing; a gift. 3. In the canon law, the presentation of a clergyman to a
beneÞce by a bishop, who has it in his own gift or patronage. Collation includes both
presentation and institution. When the patron of a church is not a bishop, he presents his
clerk for admission, and the bishop institutes him; but if a bishop is the patron, his
presentation and institution are one act and are called collation. 4. In common law, THE
PRESENTATION OF A COPY TO ITS ORIGINAL, AND A COMPARISON MADE BY
EXAMINATION, TO ASCERTAIN ITS CONFORMITY; also, the report of the act made by
the proper ofÞcers. 5. In Scots law, THE RIGHT WHICH AN HEIR HAS OF THROWING
THE WHOLE HERITABLE AND MOVABLE ESTATES OF THE DECEASED INTO ONE
MASS, and sharing it equally with others who are OF THE SAME DEGREE OF KINDRED.
6. A repast between full meals; as a cold collation. Collation of seals, denotes one seal set on the
same label, on the reverse of another. (Webs1828)

COLLATERAL - adjective - 1. Being by the side, side by side, on the side, or side to side. In his
bright radiance and collateral light. Must I be comforted, not in his sphere. Collateral pressure
is pressure on the side. So we say, collateral circumstances, circumstances which accompany a
principal event. 2. IN GENEALOGY, DESCENDING FROM THE SAME STOCK OR
ANCESTOR, but not one from the other; as distinguished from lineal. LINEAL

!450
DESCENDANTS PROCEED ONE FROM ANOTHER IN A DIRECT LINE; COLLATERAL
RELATIONS SPRING FROM A COMMON ANCESTOR, BUT FROM DIFFERENT
BRANCHES OF THAT COMMON STIRPS OR STOCK. Thus the children of brothers are
collateral relations, having different fathers, but a common grandfather. 3. Collateral security,
is security for the PERFORMANCE of covenants or the payment of money, besides the
principal security. 4. Running parallel. 5. Diffused on either side; springing from relations; as,
collateral love. 6. Not direct, or immediate. If by direct or collateral hand. 7. Concurrent; as,
collateral strength. - noun - A collateral relation or kinsman. (Webs1828)

COLLATE - verb transitive - Literally, to bring or lay together. Hence, 1. To lay together and
compare, by examining the points in which two or more things of a SIMILAR kind agree or
disagree… 3. To bestow or confer… - verb intransitive - To place in a beneÞce, as by a bishop.
(Webs1828)

RELATE - verb transitive - [Latin relatus, refero; re and fero, to produce.] 1. To tell; to recite; TO
NARRATE THE PARTICULARS OF AN EVENT; as, to relate the story of Priam; to relate
the adventures of Don Quixote. 2. To bring back; to restore. [Not in use.] 3. TO ALLY BY
CONNECTION OR KINDRED. To relate one's self, to vent thoughts in words. - verb
intransitive - TO HAVE REFERENCE OR RESPECT; to regard. All negative words relate to
positive ideas. (Webs1828)

RELATED - participle passive - 1. RECITED; NARRATED. 2. - adjective - Allied by kindred;

CONNECTED BY BLOOD OR ALLIANCE, particularly by consanguinity; as a person
related in the Þrst or second degree. (Webs1828)

RELATION - noun - [Latin relatio, refero.] 1. THE ACT OF TELLING; RECITAL; ACCOUNT;
NARRATION; NARRATIVE OF FACTS; AS A HISTORICAL RELATION. We listened to the
relation of his adventures. 2. RESPECT; reference; regard. I have been importuned to make
some observations on this art, in relation to its agreement with poetry. 3. Connection between
things; mutual respect, or WHAT ONE THING IS WITH REGARD TO ANOTHER; AS
THE RELATION OF A CITIZEN TO THE STATE; THE RELATION OF A SUBJECT TO
THE SUPREME AUTHORITY; the relation of husband and wife, or OF MASTER AND
SERVANT; THE RELATION OF A STATE OF PROBATION TO A STATE OF
RETRIBUTION. 4. Kindred; alliance; as the relation of parents and children. Relations dear,
and all the charities of father, son and brother, Þrst were known. 5. A person connected by
consanguinity or afÞnity; a kinsman or kinswoman. He passed a month with his relations in
the country. 6. Resemblance of phenomena; ANALOGY. 7. In geometry, ratio; proportion.
(Webs1828)

RE - A preÞx or inseparable particle in the composition of words, denotes RETURN,

REPETITION, iteration… (Webs1828)

ITERATION - noun - [Latin iteratio.] Repetition; recital or PERFORMANCE A SECOND

TIME. (Webs1828)

LATE - adjective - [This word is from the root of LET, the sense of which is to draw out, extend
or prolong, hence to be slow or late. See Let. This adjective has regular terminations of the
comparative and superlative degrees, later, latest, but it has also latter, and latest is often
contracted into last.]… 3. LAST, OR RECENTLY IN ANY PLACE, OFFICE OR
CHARACTER; as the late ministry; the late administration. 4. Existing not long ago, but now
decayed or DEPARTED; as the late bishop of London… (Webs1828)

LET - verb transitive preterit tense and participle passive - Letted is obsolete. [To let out, like Latin
elocare, is TO LEASE.] 1. To permit; to allow; to suffer; to give leave or power by a positive
act, OR NEGATIVELY, to withhold restraint; not to prevent… To lease; TO GRANT
POSSESSION AND USE for a compensation… 3. To suffer; to permit… 4. In the imperative

!451
mode, let has the following uses. Followed by the Þrst and third persons, it expresses desire
or wish; hence it is used in prayer and entreaty to superiors, AND TO THOSE WHO HAVE
US IN THEIR POWER; as, let me not wander from thy commandments. Psalms 119:10.
Followed by the Þrst person plural, let expresses exhortation or entreaty; as, rise, let us go.
FOLLOWED BY THE THIRD PERSON, IT IMPLIES PERMISSION OR COMMAND
ADDRESSED TO AN INFERIOR. Let him go, let them remain, are commands addressed to
the second person. Let thou, or let ye, that is, do thou or you permit him to go. Sometimes let is
used to express A COMMAND OR INJUNCTION TO A THIRD PERSON. When the signal
is given to engage, let every man do his duty. When applied to things not rational, it implies
allowance or concession. O'er golden sands let rich Pactolus ßow. 5. TO RETARD; TO
HINDER; TO IMPEDE; TO INTERPOSE OBSTRUCTIONS. 2 Thessalonians 2:3. [This sense
is now obsolete, or nearly so.] To let alone, to leave; to suffer to remain without
intermeddling… TO LET LOOSE, TO FREE FROM RESTRAINT; TO PERMIT TO
WANDER AT LARGE. TO LET IN OR INTO, TO PERMIT OR SUFFER TO ENTER; TO
ADMIT… also, to lease or let to hire. To let off, to discharge, to let ßy, as an arrow; or cause to
explode, as a gunÉ (Webs1828)

LETTER - noun - [from LET.] 1. ONE WHO PERMITS. 2. ONE WHO RETARDS OR
HINDERS. 3. ONE WHO GIVES VENT; AS A BLOOD-LETTER. - noun - [Latin litera.] 1. A
MARK OR CHARACTER, written, printed, engraved or painted; used as the representative
of a sound, or of an articulation of the human organs of speechÉ Letters patent, or overt,
open, a writing executed and sealed, BY WHICH POWER AND AUTHORITY ARE
GRANTED TO A PERSON TO DO SOME ACT, OR ENJOY SOME RIGHT; as letters patent
under the seal of England. - verb transitive - To impress or form letters on; as, to letter a book; a
book gilt and lettered. (Webs1828)

REFER - verb transitive - [Latin refero; re and fero, TO BEAR.] 1. To direct, leave or DELIVER
over to another person or tribunal FOR INFORMATION or decision… 2. TO REDUCE AS
TO THE ULTIMATE END. You profess and practice to refer all things to yourself. 3. TO
REDUCE; TO ASSIGN; AS TO AN ORDER, GENUS OR CLASS. Naturalists are sometimes
at a loss to know to what class or genus an animal or plant is to be referred. TO REFER ONE'S
SELF, TO BETAKE; to apply. [Little used.] - verb intransitive - 1. TO RESPECT; TO HAVE
RELATION. Many passages of Scripture refer to the peculiar customs of the orientals. 2. To
appeal; to have recourse; to apply. In suits it is good to refer to some friend of trust. 3. To
allude; to have respect to by intimation without naming. I refer to a well known fact.
(Webs1828)

BETAKE - verb transitive preterit tense - [be and take.] 1. To take to; to have recourse to; to
apply; to resort; with the reciprocal pronoun; as, TO BETAKE OURSELVES TO ARMS, or to
action. It generally implies a motion towards an object, as to betake ourselves to a shade
grove; or an application of the mind or faculties, corresponding with such motion, as to
betake ourselves to study or to vice. 2. Formerly, TO TAKE OR SEIZE. (Webs1828)

REFERENCE - noun - 1. A sending, dismission or direction TO ANOTHER FOR

INFORMATION. 2. RELATION; RESPECT; VIEW TOWARDS. The christian religion
commands sobriety, temperance and moderation, in reference to our appetites and passions. 3.
Allusion to. In his observations he had no reference to the case which has been stated. 4. In
law, the process of ASSIGNING A CAUSE DEPENDING IN COURT, for a hearing and
decision, to persons appointed by the court. (Webs1828)

REFERABLE - adjective - 1. That may be referred; CAPABLE OF BEING CONSIDERED IN

RELATION TO SOMETHING ELSE. 2. That may be assigned; THAT MAY BE
CONSIDERED AS BELONGING TO OR RELATED TO. It is a question among
philosophers, whether all the attractions which obtain between bodies, are referable to one
general cause. (Webs1828)

!452
 REFERRED - participle passive - DISMISSED OR DIRECTED TO ANOTHER; ASSIGNED,
AS TO A CLASS, ORDER OR CAUSE; assigned by a court to persons appointed to decide.
(Webs1828)

REFERRING - participle present tense - Dismissing or directing TO ANOTHER FOR

INFORMATION; alluding; assigning, as to a class, order, cause, etc.; OR ASSIGNING TO
PRIVATE PERSONS FOR DECISION. (Webs1828)

—=—

Please note here that the word let is equal to what public citizenship is, the government (district)
being the letter (enfranchiser). The author again urges the reader to take nothing for granted in this
work, and reminds the reader again that all words so deÞned herein, especially those emboldened
and capitalized, were a time-consuming and ultra-important effort to bring knowledge and
enlightenment from the chaos of our stumbling block of this pet language created for illiterate
slaves, dog-Latin. All dots in this work eventually connect, and only by grasping the whole will the
parts paint their picture. Dismiss nothing. Take your time to comprehend AND under-stand (stand
under) the authority of the meanings of these legalese words not from your own desire or
adversarial perspective as a victim already defeated by such word-magic, but from the purview of
they who rule you through this magic spelling. Only when the slave learns the language of his
master can the slave free himself from the otherwise intangible chains those words manifest in our
minds. Knowledge of what is occultly hidden brings Natural Equity (True equality) and destroys
any prima facie (presumption of) authority. Only Þction (lies) may disrupt the Truth of GodÕs
Creation and Law, and even the sacred (cursed) constitutions of these pirates admit Þrst and fore-
most that all MEN are Created Equal. When man bears the proprietary words, names, and titles of
another man (false god), then the Natural and ambiguous qualities of man (e.g., self-evident
Equality) are pretended to be destroyed by such an adversarial act of Self-deceit against the Truth.

And so here we crack open the mythos of blood relation, of the true intent and purpose of
genealogical birth recording and the perpetually continuing story and saga of those fabled, “Royal”
bloodlines as a lineal connection. Is the blood connection Real? Of course. This is not in question.
Does that blood connection legitimize some crown, corporation, or other token of authority with
each new man that dons it? Does some magical feat of empowerment and legitimacy happen
simply because oneÕs son or daughterÕs accident of birth is connected to oneÕs own? Does the
Queen or King of the United Kingdom Truly own one-sixth of the entirety of the land of the Earth
while billions go without any land of their own?

ItÕs just a foolish story that is subsequently under-stood by fools, a fable of blood designed to pass
on a corporation and estate based on false, unearned, legally created titles. It is the attaching of
artiÞce (estate) to the Reality of Nature (blood). One is passed Naturally, the other by words on
paper based on such fabled history (his story) of sovereign blood-right. For it is not a proof of
blood, but of Þctional entities of the past and present. It is the Þctions of the strawman, the sur-
name, the wealth and estates, and the titles that are passed, not merely the blood (Reality). It is the
slaves of one slaveholder being charged to the care and forced employments of the next generation.
Without these Þctions, what would be the point of tracking such genealogy records, for all men
would only bear the blood of Jesus christ (of his own True Source and Nature), and no man would
therefore want for anything of such Þctional origins. Any power acquired by any man of God
would be gladly given away to enrich all others. This is the absolute opposite of that Þctional
system of magistrates. The landholders tell the story (fable) of their ancestors as blood relation so as
to connect and collate every man with or without that apparent blood relation and more
speciÞcally the honorary, imaginary titles and estate assigned to that name, but only for the
purposes of ßattery so as to acquire the purely ßattering titles and respects that were fabled to be-
long to some family line (name/noun). A king, for instance, cannot be king without such a legally
(positively) provable blood connection, and must prove his place within that jigsaw puzzle of
lineage to justify his authority under that bloody crown. Likewise, by law, title of landed estate
only transfers lawfully through blood, from the blood and Arms of father to son, and this

!453
connection is considered as self-evident since the son’s status (public or private, free or slave)
follows the parents. Public persons (US citizen-ships), however, have no blood, standing in
contracted attainder (corruption of blood) in Caesar’s district (seizure, distraint, distress), and so
have very little value in genealogical history or its purpose. A common, public person holds no
lands, and passes only defective title and debt to its children, which are only other legal (bloodless)
persons of the state, their father being the nation (of the People) they were legally birthed
(abandoned) and de-livered to.

Let us take the current and past kings and queens of England/Great Britain (United Kingdom) for
example.

—=—

“Is The Crown Estate the Queen’s property company?”

“Myth-busting: While The Crown Estate belongs to the reigning

monarch 'IN RIGHT OF THE CROWN' AND THE MONARCH
REMAINS THE LEGAL OWNER, IT IS THE CROWN ESTATE ITSELF
WHICH HAS THE POWERS OF MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL…”

“Since 1760, the net income of THE CROWN ESTATE HAS BEEN
SURRENDERED TO THE EXCHEQUER by the Monarch under
successive Civil List Acts, passed at the beginning of each reign. The
Crown Estate is though owned by the Monarch in right of the Crown.
This means that the Queen owns it by virtue of holding the position of
reigning Monarch, for as long as she is on the throne, as will her
successor. RESPONSIBILITY FOR MANAGING THE CROWN ESTATE
IS TRUSTED TO US, UNDER THE CROWN ESTATE ACT, AND THE
QUEEN IS NOT INVOLVED IN MANAGEMENT DECISIONS… In
the UK "the Crown" is used not only to describe the Monarch, BUT
ALSO THE EXECUTIVE AND THE JUDICIARY. THUS PROPERTIES
OWNED AND MANAGED BY GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS ARE
ALSO CROWN PROPERTY; these have nothing to do with the funding
of the Monarchy or The Crown Estate… In 2011 the Sovereign Grant Act
became law. Under the Act THE CROWN ESTATE CONTINUES TO
GIVE ITS ENTIRE ANNUAL SURPLUS (NET PROFIT) TO THE
TREASURY. The Act simply provides a mechanism that will be used by
the Treasury to determine the amount of Government funding for the
Monarch by reference to the amount of our annual surplus.”
—The Crown Estate website (thecrownestate.co.uk), History and Faq sections

—=—

!454
Just as in the so-called “United States” corporation, the false his-story of romantic, fabled stories
proclaiming the glorious founding of these kingdoms “under God” are as they always were but lies
told to justify their modern institutions as purely commercial entities that protect organized crime.
The puppet show that the current ÒqueenÓ portrays is supported only by the legal strings and Þscal
allowances made by the Treasury (exchequer) of these legal districts of debtor’s hell. The mask
(persona and ßattering title) of ÒqueenÓ or Òking,Ó in other words, is merely property of the Crown
Corporation. The Òlegal ownerÓ is not the possessor and disposer, just the user of its beneÞts and
the current, controlled master of its proprietary strings. There is no “she” or “he” present therein.
There is only the legal ofÞce (ßattering title). To even refer to any Natural (God-given) trait of the
current man occupying such a supposedly ÒroyalÓ ofÞce of corporate sovereignty (antichrist god-
ship) is to intentionally con-fuse Þction with Reality, to believe (love) what is not of Nature. Do not
do IT (Òthe queenÓ) the service of referring to it as anything of or under God, for IT has no sex, no
blood, no soul, and no Life. IT is just a sole corporation (artiÞcial person) that is property of a larger
corporation. The ÒqueenÓ is not a female, for Þction carries no such beauty Ñ no such gift of
Jehovah.

Just as the ÒpresidentÓ of the United Sates is no king, operating solely in a corporate CEO position
of that seat of government over the corporation of Washington DC and its public trust over public
lands, the man under that mask (persona and ßattering title) is merely a ÒmortalÓ man bearing an
“immortal” corporation sole (god-hood) that will pass to his elected successor. And so we may
understand why all the gods of the nations are indeed merely idols, or rather, men wearing the
ceremonial and sacred (cursed) masks of the idols (artiÞcial persons/corporations) they portray. No
man is ever actually a king, queen, prime minister, or president, for these are only aÞctional
Þctionalentities
entities
(personas/masks) created by corrupted men, as legalizing, ßattering titles with no self-Existence
anywhere in Nature. They simply are not Real. We worship Þctions of law as our leaders. And we
pray (plead) to them and their agents like the gods they believe themselves to be.

Crown (corporation) land is also known as royal domain or demesne, and consists merely of a
territorial area belonging to the monarch/Crown Corporation. But is the man (male or female)
actually the monarch? Or is the ÒmonarchÓ again merely a proprietary status, lying strictly as a
Þctional, ßattering title belonging to the Crown Corporation? To comprehend this we again must
look towards the concept of personiÞcation. Is an ofÞce in any way a man? Is a man ever actually,
in Reality, the ofÞcer (agent or principal) he plays?

The current Queen is quite simply wearing a mask. This is to say that the persona of that so-called
ÒRoyalÓ blood-lineage is appointed (legally and ecclesiastically anointed with oils) as the
PERSONIFICATION of the Crown. The crown is a false god, an idol. The man currently calling
herself in persona as ÒElizabethÓ is not in any way an actual Òqueen.Ó There is no such thing in the
Nature of Reality under Jehovah. A ÒmonarchÓ exists only in Þction, never in Truth. No butterßy is
ever actually a ÒMonarchÓ either, for this is nothing more than a positive (proprietary) term of
manÕs artful language and controlling law, not a negative (ambiguous) term of Nature. Flattering
titles are not Real, and certainly not of Jehovah. She is just a frail old man that in Nature (without
title) would be as helpless a female as any of her faithful (believing) subjects. She is posing as an
acting, Þctionally living idol (crown), a pretended god anthropomorphized into hu-man form,
acting as just another vain and obscenely wealthy vicar of that poorest of the charitably poor Jesus
christ. She (IT) is but one of many antichrists the Bible speaks of, even as most of us walk upon that
same false path she and other idols of the nations leads us towards in the pursuit of the Crown
CorporationsÕs proprietary script (money) and beneÞcent entitlements (false valuations). Antichrist
is not a name, not a monster… it is a name (noun)! It is the name of each of our own lifestyles
under this legal law of false gods (antagonists of christ) in mammon. It is manifested through our
actions. It is the anti-verb, the antithesis of Jehovah.

ANTICHRIST - Against Christ, or AN OPPOSITION CHRIST, A RIVAL CHRIST. The word

is used only by the apostle John. Referring to FALSE TEACHERS, he says (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3;
2 John 1:7), "Even now are there many antichrists." (1.) This name has been applied to the
"little horn" of the "king of Þerce countenance" (Dan. 7:24, 25; 8:23-25). (2.) It has been applied

!455
 also to the "FALSE CHRISTS" spoken of by our Lord (Matt. 24:5, 23, 24). (3.) To the "man of
sin" described by Paul (2 Thess. 2:3, 4, 8-10). (4.) And to the "BEAST FROM THE SEA" (Rev.
13:1; 17:1-18). (—Easton’s 1897 Bible Dictionary)

—=—

Amazingly, in the end and once all the Þctional veils are removed, no actual man is ever our ruler.
It is only our own belief (love of) and respect in whatever token of ownership any man bears as his
or her blood-right and property (title) that causes us to follow that antichrist law (lifestyle) and its
personiÞed Þgurehead. To be clear, WE ARE RULED BY CORPORATIONS (ARTIFICIAL
PERSONS) AND NOTHING ELSE. We are ruled by artiÞcial intelligence, by words on paper.

This fallacious ßattery of the ÒnobilityÓ of the bloodlines and the power structure it magically
creates is why the Words of Jesus the christos (Anointed with God’s Gladness) is so important, for
we all may apply for that Þgurative blood of the Son (Word) of God without exception and without
exclusion. Our resume is our works, our actions, the law we follow; not some empty name or title,
and certainly not any ceremony in some corporate church. And yet this Þgurative blood is passed to
no man through some recorded and registered genealogy, but only by one’s moral Life and actions.
It is not attained, it is Lived. It is not a badge or a crown. It has no Life in vain symbols and signs. It
is a Purity of knowledge without artiÞce, without inßuence and worship of lies. And this is why
the holders of Crowns and ßattering titles such as ÒPopeÓ and ÒKingÓ are so afraid of the Bible and
its spiritual guidance and Ultimate knowledge; why they purposefully mistranslated it to hide
such a spiritual path. It is why through so-called holy ÒCrusadesÓ such corporations of church and
state have slaughtered countless millions in their wake, in order to retain that idol that pretends
them power over the false doctrines (laws) they proclaim with the antichrist authority of false gods.

And you think the United States is any less of a corporation, that the title of ÒPresidentÓ is any less
an idol of that artiÞcial persona of CaesarÕs district and capital personiÞed by one of that same so-
called ÒRoyalÓ bloodline? The difference between the moral parable of the allegory of Jesus christ
as the personiÞcation of GodÕs Law (Word) and these tokens of false gods assigned pretended
authority is very simple to understand. Christ saves all men from legal (anti-God) judgement
(person-hood). Kings attempt to force all men in to legal (anti-God) pre-judgement through
condemnation in personhood (subjection). Christ rules Þguratively over those who follow the Law
(Word) of God. Kings and Popes may rule only over those who accept false gods and the doctrines
(laws) of men, and only by the violent force of its Order-following, law-enforcing agents in uni-
form. There is no sameness or even similarity here but for the images and trickery of the church
and state in its pretended usurpation and replacement of GodÕs Son (Word/Law) with themselves
and their perpetual blood kin. This is, in the end, merely the difference between government and
self-governance. It is the ability to control one’s own mind by controlling one’s own actions under
the Highest and self-evident Law, standing opposed to those that follow false gods in the Þctional
matrix of artiÞcial law. The man of God, as the follower of christ (Word/Law), has cleansed his
own brain of all artiÞce. Those who remain attached to such Þctional entities and corporations are
brainwashed. To be mentally washed is not the same as becoming spiritually cleansed.

Comparatively, we can turn to the Bible to Þnd the path towards recognizing and abiding by only
what is the self-evident Truth despite these idolatrous frauds. This metaphoric blood of christ is no
corporate birthright, no accident of birth, and certainly no vial of grape juice in some corporate,
denominated ÒChristianÓ churchÕs false, necromantic communion (communication) ceremony. This
word communion is intended to be an adjective describing those men Living under God’s Natural
Law in communion (togetherness) with each other through christ, not as a Romanized pagan
ceremony (noun) pretending magical connections to a dead man named or personiÞed in Roman
calendric history as ÒJesus Christ.Ó

The blood of christ is no ßattering title or fabled lineage. It is not written as words and symbols on
paper. It saves not merely those noble few pretenders from the common multitude via some fabled
timeline of heritage and mysteriously kept privacy under an ornamental rose. It is for all men, all of

!456
God’s Creation. It is purely a performance covenant of Grace with God, a negative duty towards all
Creation (Nature). And this Þgurative blood connection is a spiritual potentiality lying in wait
within us all, patiently waiting for us to wake up from our own matrix of legal lies. It is the
Þgurative (Higher) Nature of this blood of christ that must be recognized, its timelessness and
pricelessness. For no claim to some history or family lineage can be used to obtain it, though the
pretenders and antichrists certainly do a good job in their ceremony and show, as do most pro-
claimed corporate “Christians” as their followers, whom never actually follow christ in their daily
actions. But the self-evident Truth as written in scripture is that God respects no surnames or
ßattering titles, which are the very purpose of the recording of such fabled genealogies.

Some may take exception to this, as if it is merely the author’s vain opinion and not what is the
Word of God. For after all, the book of Matthew appears to lay out the ÒbloodlineÓ of Jesus christ.
But we must remember not to be so literal, to seek the meaning of these words in their parabolic
and Þgurative form and intent. Christ is labeled as the Son of God, and yet here we somehow
vulgarly think of this word Son as an actual human characteristic. Matthew states, in its Þrst
chapter, that Jesus christ is the Òson of David.Ó But how can that be? That just doesnÕt jive with the
rest of the story (his story).

Strong's #G5207 - hues - is translated as the word ÒsonÓ in these Þrst verses of Matthew. Note that
this word son is not capitalized in this particular usage, as it is when the term ÒSon of God” is
utilized in a capitalized and speciÞc formality.

Of the various meanings attributed to the word depending on its use and context, the lexicon entry
for son states the following:

“G5207 - hues - Those who revere GOD AS THEIR FATHER, the PIOUS WORSHIPPERS of
God, those who IN CHARACTER AND LIFE resemble God, those who are GOVERNED BY
THE SPIRIT OF GOD, REPOSE THE SAME CALM AND JOYFUL TRUST IN GOD
WHICH CHILDREN DO IN THEIR PARENTS (Rom. 8:14, Gal. 3:26 ), and hereafter in the
blessedness and glory of the life eternal WILL OPENLY WEAR THIS DIGNITY OF THE
SONS OF GOD. Term used preeminently of Jesus Christ, as enjoying the supreme love of
God, united to him in affectionate intimacy, privy to his saving councils, obedient to the
Father's will in all his acts.”

—=—

It is this very vulgar and purposeful mis-transliteration of the word son by the kingÕs scribes and
translators that cause hopelessly literalist men to believe in the same, generationally passed christ-
blood of kings and popes. This is foolishness, for the Word (Son) is not of this world, but is the
Spirit of the Law (Word) of God. And the Word is for all men to inherit, not merely some false
nobility of landholders (pirates). The word son is also used to describe Adam (mankind) and also
those who are Òborn again.Ó In the Old testament, by the Jewish law, it was the Jews that were the
sons. In the New Testament, it is the followers of christ as the eternal obeyers of the Word/Son.
These are not ÒChristians,Ó for the Law of God expressly forbids such ßattering titles, and such a
title emanates only from the legal realm of Caesar. In contrast, the term “son of man” is used in
opposition to those sons of God, sons (followers) of man being considered as weak and mortal in
the ßesh, and also as one who is dependent on another or is his follower. Naturally, the gods of the
nations have set up their systems of human capital management and false scarcity of money and
commodity markets so as to cause all common men to believe we are dependent on government for
Life (livelihood), though nothing could possibly be farther from the Truth. For government is a
dead thing (noun), not a Living Being (verb), and only the necromancer worships the dead to gain
power over the Living.

And so the correct question is not to ask: who are the sons of God? The correct inquiry is: what does
the word son mean and how may I become One? And the only answer is by following christÕs
example; not to be stuck in the art form of his words, but to be christ-like in all of our actions.

!457
Unfortunately, citizenship to the false, idolatrous gods of the nations causes us to be seen as less
than childlike, not self-responsible or Lawful enough, and certainly not Þt to be heirs, and so we are
set to wander as subjects in the commercial debtor’s hell of the nations (districts) for the duration of
our contracted dis-ease of artiÞcial life.

—=—

“Now I say, That THE HEIR, AS LONG AS HE IS A CHILD,

DIFFERETH NOTHING FROM A SERVANT, THOUGH HE BE LORD
OF ALL; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of
the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under
the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come,
God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, MADE UNDER THE LAW,
TO REDEEM THEM THAT WERE UNDER THE LAW, THAT WE
MIGHT RECEIVE THE ADOPTION OF SONS. And because ye are
sons, GOD HATH SENT FORTH THE SPIRIT OF HIS SON INTO
YOUR HEARTS, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a
servant, but a son; AND IF A SON, THEN AN HEIR OF GOD
THROUGH CHRIST.

“Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which
by nature are no gods. But now, after that ye have known God, or rather
are known of God, HOW TURN YE AGAIN TO THE WEAK AND
BEGGARLY ELEMENTS, WHEREUNTO YE DESIRE AGAIN TO BE IN
BONDAGE? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.”
—Galatians 4:1-7, 8-10, KJB

—=—

But the Þrst chapter of Matthew says that Jesus christ is also somehow the Òson of David.Ó What
happened to Jehovah? And hell, what happened to Joseph and Mary? Just how many fathers of the
same son can there be, unless the word son is not meant to be taken as a literal translation? And so
we arrive back, not at some genealogical wasteland of history, but at the self-evident Truth of God.

Still not convinced? Well, then why donÕt you go drink some wine or unfermented grape juice as
the Þgurative blood of christ at some corporate churchÕs communion ceremony? By all means,
continue fooling yourself that this juice is the literal blood of christ you are drinking, a habitually
paeanistic and just downright strange custom resembling some sick vampire genre movie or
heathen ritual sacriÞce. Do you really think this is what christ through Jehovah commands of you?
To participate in a ceremonial Þction? Seriously?

Let us be clear and speak plainly here. No man is a ÒChristianÓ (noun). No man is respected by
GodÕs Nature to have such a ßattering title. One must act the part, which again causes the word
christian to be an adjective or verb (a description of oneÕs continuous, uninterrupted actions/
works), not a noun (name/ßattering title). What you did yesterday and what you might do in the
future has nothing to do with being (acting) christ-like in this very moment, as being always in the
present. We cannot pretend ÒChristianityÓ on Sundays and false holidays (corporate holy days in
mammon) and then claim to be ÒchristianÓ as we act unspiritually against the Word (Son) at all

!458
other times (days). We are either acting in christ’s example at all times or we are not. It’s cut and
dry, the ultimate in Natural Reason. And in no way does our history determine our present or our
future. Our history, including that of our forefathers and their constituted governments of persons,
places, and things (proprietary, proper nouns), is never an excuse for our own behavior. Asking
what would Jesus do is inÞnitely less ridiculous on its face than asking what would George
Washington or Benjamin Franklin do?

Personally (for my Self), it took a very long time and was a very long journey to Þnally under-stand
this. Now that I do, I can no longer fool myself nor dismiss these self-evident Truths. I can no
longer fallaciously demonize the Bible to justify my artiÞcial life following mammon, and now may
only see the demon that is my own corrupted and blotted (marked) third person. The Bible is the
ultimate comic book (moral story) with man’s ultimate super hero Created within — and the hero
can only ever be you, and me, and each and every man that Þnds his or her True Self again through
the blood of Jesus christ, the Word (Son) of Jehovah. We now know this to be not some silly religious
term spoken by ignorant victims of the church in some empty name and form of Romanized
ÒChristianÓ ceremony of communion complete with dress and title, but as the self-evident Law. For
whatever is of Jesus christ (the Son) is of the Father (Jehovah), the Living Word (Þgurative blood) as
the personiÞed Law of Nature.

On the inverse we Þnd this notion of common (national) relation by information and delivery
(abandonment), as will be more thoroughly examined in this work. The legal status of blood and
corruption of blood follows the timeline of genealogy, telling the story of each class of persons. The
master follows and bears the status of the master and the slave the slave. A private birth is private,
while a public birth is a registered burden of tax (tribute and tithing) to CaesarÕs district. The state
becomes the father of the man, who is generally assigned a person (public status), to act per the
surrogate son (per-son) of the father (principal government) through the agency relationship. This
birth certiÞcation process is the nativity event of every man, just as christ was born in his own
nativity scene. But due to language arts and the confusion they are intended to cause, we must
uncover that which is hidden to discover that the word nativity is actually the state of being born a
slave, as a ÒnativeÓ of a nation or country. We are taught in our public-mindedness that being
native-born is a good thing of course, for we tend to be unaware of the dog-Latin used to control us
publicly. And so we believe (love) that our nativity (by legal, artiÞcial birth) to a nation, where all
gods are idols, is actually a good thing. It offers security and protection, right? But let us have a
glimpse as to what our birth nativity scenes, as told through vital statistic information and
certiÞcation of dog-Latin through legal birth registration (tax), actually means in its Latin origin. In
other words, what is the legalized version of this word nativity in the language of the corruptors?

NATIVITAS - Villenage; that state in which MEN WERE BORN SLAVES. (Black4)

NATIVUS - Latin. In old English law, A NATIVE; speciÞcally, ONE BORN INTO A
CONDITION OF SERVITUDE; A BORN SERF OR VILLEIN. (Black4)

NATIVA - A niefe or female villein. So called because for the most part BOUND BY
NATIVITY. (Black4)

NATIVI DE STIPITE - Villeins or bondmen BY BIRTH OR STOCK. (Black4)

NATIVI CONVENTIONARII - Villeins or bondmen BY CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT.

(Black4)

NATIONALITY - That quality or CHARACTER which arises from the fact of A PERSON'S
BELONGING TO A NATION OR STATE. Nationality determines the POLITICAL STATUS
of the individual, especially with reference to ALLEGIANCE; WHILE DOMICILE
DETERMINES HIS CIVIL STATUS. Nationality arises either BY BIRTH OR BY
NATURALIZATION. According to Savigny, "nationality" is also used as OPPOSED TO
"TERRITORIALITY," for the purpose of distinguishing the case of a nation having no
national territory; e.g., THE JEWS. (Black4)

!459
 NATIVE - A natural-born SUBJECT OR CITIZEN; A DENIZEN BY BIRTH; ONE WHO
OWES HIS DOMICILE OR CITIZENSHIP TO THE FACT OF HIS BIRTH WITHIN THE
COUNTRY REFERRED TO. The term may also include one born abroad, if his parents were
then citizens of the country, and NOT PERMANENTLY RESIDING IN FOREIGN PARTS.
The word "natives", as used in ALIEN ENEMY ACT, refers to PERSON'S PLACE OF BIRTH,
so that A PERSON REMAINS A NATIVE OF COUNTRY OF HIS BIRTH, though he has
moved away therefrom… (Black4)

—=—

Still feeling patriotic? Still wanting to hang the United States district commercial and war ßag on
your home for every federal holiday? Still think a citizen-ship is anything but voluntary slavery?
Still love the Þction that is your ÒnativeÓ country? Is there any soul, moral compunction, free will
or self-determination left in you?

We must examine brießy here the opposite of nationality, that being the term territorial. While
nationality represents a Þctional jurisdiction or district of the artful nation, the term territory is
referential to the actual land that such jurisdiction sits upon. This is to say that the private land-
holders own the territory, while the public citizenships own a usufruct (tenancy and rent on the
land) by permission of the landholder.

TERRITORY - noun - [Latin territorium, from terra, EARTH.] 1. The extent or compass of
LAND within the bounds or belonging to the jurisdiction of any STATE, city or other body.
Linger not in my territories. They erected a house within their own territory. Arts and sciences
took their rise and ßourished only in those small territories where the people were free. 2. A
TRACT OF LAND BELONGING TO AND UNDER THE DOMINION OF A PRINCE OR
STATE, LYING AT A DISTANCE FROM THE PARENT COUNTRY OR FROM THE SEAT
OF GOVERNMENT; as the territories of the East India Company; the territories of the
United States; the territory of MICHIGAN; NORTHWEST TERRITORY. These DISTRICTS
of country, WHEN RECEIVED INTO THE UNION AND ACKNOWLEDGED TO BE
STATES, LOSE THE APPELLATION (NAME) of territory. (Webs1828)

—=—

While a territory is at least representative of the Real land or ÒEarth,Ó the nation is purely a Þctional
place. Thus a ÒStateÓ is a proper noun referring to a private (several) People upon the land, a
territory so named by its People who hold those territorial lands as a single, private body corporate
(State) invented in a patented perfection of title in allodium (in their own right), while the
constituted government of those People is called as the non-proper noun (uncapitalized) Òstate,Ó a
Þction of law (artiÞcial person) designed for control of interstate commerce and taxation over
foreign third parties such as United States citizen-ships in agency for public functions. While a
private citizen may travel on public lands, a public person may not travel on any private estate of
the territory (State). To be clear, no State was ever formed without it Þrst becoming a territory
under the care and trust of the united States of America (in Congress assembled). The territory is
managed, of course, by the ÒUnited StatesÓ district, the nation, a municipal holding corporation of
the People (States) in confederation (conspiracy/combination) and controlled by congress
assembled as State representatives (We, the People), where such legal, militarized agencies as the
US Forest Service are again created by Congress assembled. So the de jure (legitimate) Congress
creates the de facto (illegitimate/militarily enforced) federal agency for the protection of their
territories against us (the public masses of illiterates), allowing us annual and day passes for a fee
to publicly wander in their territories, a short vacation from our general, voluntary slavery as
human capital. How nice…

One fact is very important to remember here, and it will be expounded upon as we continue in this
work. A public citizen-ship of the United States (Washington DC) is not a private citizen of any
State (People). Therefore a United States citizen-ship cannot hold land, for the United States is

!460
foreign to all States. In other words, and this is key, the “United States” is not a State (People),
though it is sometimes called in nickname as “the state.” The District of Columbia was created only
after the original States ceded their lands to the “United States.” Thus the land (territory) within
that border of New Columbia is not one of the States in Union. Instead, it is a creation of those
States (People) in Congress assembled. The States (People) of America created the United States
separate (foreign) from their original confederation and compact and placed it under the exclusive
jurisdiction of Congress. The States are not under Congress, they are represented by it. The
common citizenships of the United States are under Congressional Law, while the private People of
the territories (States) are under private law that is exclusive of United States public law, as that
which is positively created by Congress. The “United States” was established by the private
(several) States (People) for their own protection, for the protection of their privacy (severalty), and
for the protection of their property (privately held lands). The public is not a party to this
protection (as constituted), and is in fact that which these landholders are being protected from.
The United States protects the territories of the private People (States) from all threats, both foreign
and domestic. And so to be clear, one's nationality is a sign of one's political status (legal person) as
based on nativity, and a nationality of “United States” in any form is wholly un-American, and
signiÞes an allegiance to the People of the territory called as ÒAmerica,Ó as those States united in
confederation, combination, and open conspiracy.

As strange as this is to hear, we must comprehend that a United States citizenship is not technically
an “American,” for the district of our domicile is not in “the united States of America.” One must
be one of the People of a private (several) State in that Union to be an “American.” The United
States, as a district and as the seat of commercial government, is not properly called “America.” It
is called (styled) only as the “United States.” If it were called “Russia” instead of the “United
States” absolutely nothing of its actual structure would change accept this meaningless word
(noun/title). The People of America would remain as they originally styled themselves. Only their
created municipal corporation’s name would change, not the name of the People. The title does not
make the Reality.

But we must be clear that no man of God following in christ’s teachings would carry such a false
persona and ßattering title as these anyway, for neither the United States or America actually Exist in
Nature. They are not Creations of God. And that is the whole point. For we could spend hours
debating, deliberating, and possibly violently Þghting over the correct terminology of these terms,
but in the end our entire disagreement would be over some thing that does not actually Exist in
Nature. WeÕd be arguing over an artiÞcial description of an artiÞcial noun (place). This is the realm
of fools. And those private “People” of America that keep fools as their public pets and day
laborers are quite content to keep such a Þctional de-liberation going in perpetuity, and even style it
as the truth and patriot movements, as the alternative side of a double-headed web of lies. For the
knowledge of Jehovah would destroy these empires built on Þction and an entrained ignorance of
the Laws of Reality.

This shows the inherent confusion and danger of words, for to call anything by some accepted and
consented to name does not necessarily make it as such in Reality. For instance, we believe that the
“United States” is actually the land (territory) of the united States of America, because the name is
so similar (but not the same). Yet none of these things are self-evident. Perspective is everything,
and the masters of language and word magic are more than happy to let you keep thinking what
you wish to satisfy your own ego while playing the part of a legalized (licensed) sinner in adultery,
as long as you are in the end caused to keep your public slave id-entity intact while you debate
your own commercially pre-destined, legal course and sealed fate.

You see, what we have never realized, read, or been told by that politician and priest-class that
relies on the federal “state” for its commercial operations is that we are all publicly bound in
nativity just like christ was. He was born into the slave system just like us, for that legal matrix has
existed since the beginning, the Genesis. The story of christ is also a personiÞcation of each of our
own stories, the story of each of our corrupted Selves, and is a guidepost and example to break
these chains of contractual servitude to those legal gods we are birthed to worship. It is also the

!461
story of those false gods, a hopeful tale told that they may as well someday be born again into
GodÕs Nature, giving up such false wealth, name, and title so as to Þnd the True Nature of Jehovah.
This is the Þnding of the blood of christ. The sacriÞceÉ For christÕs words were clear that we must
pick up our stake (cross) and follow Him, which means to follow the Word (Son) as the Law of God
and seek only the self-evidence and self-Existence in all things; a brilliant allegory, as beautifully
parabolic storytelling. It is the purest perfection of moral fable. And yet it is more Real than any
non-Þction can ever be, for here we are, faced with the exact trials and tribulations that were fore-
told in that timeless scriptural knowledge and forewarning. And so it is time now to make our
election strong, to choose our God, or suffer the consequences of our own ignorance and respect of
the established artiÞce and false law of that which is adversarial (satanic) to Reality. We must
abandon (deliver/render back) all things valued in mammon, which is of course all legal persons,
places and things. All legal wordsÉ

But the most important lesson to be learned here can only be learned by the staunch “literalist,” as
he who cannot see the Þgurative, metaphoric, and parabolic nature of most available knowledge
and moral teachings in this world. True knowledge, it seems, may only be captured through
actions, not words. Thus the parable is told in simulation of future actions in order to imagine the
outcomes of our actions. For this we must harness our imaginations, not destroy them. For it may
be said, as my own personal parable, that he who has no imagination at all will certainly be
controlled by they who do. The most easily brainwashed men are those who take all things only
literally, especially when reading the KingÕs translated Bible. But if I can envision in my mind the
outcome of my actions by imagining them according to the Highest of moral principles as
communicated by parabolic and allegoric stories, then I may avoid many pitfalls caused by belief in
things that lead me away from self-evident Truth. I can avoid all Þction and remain Pure. But the
literalist IÕm afraid must literally fall before he may get back up, learning only from his own actions
and unable to imagine why he should not follow some path. To see only the goal and not the
consequences of reaching or not reaching that goal is the story of the literalist fool.

So could it be said that judges are required to be literalists, administering the word of law without
any private moral constraints? It certainly could. For as we have read, and this is of vital
importance, the Natural Law of God is not enforceable by manÕs law! And because it is unwritten,
no judge may take it into consideration!

LITER - noun - [Gr.] A French MEASURE OF CAPACITYÉ (Webs1828)

LITERA - Latin. A letter. THE LETTER OF A LAW, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM ITS

SPIRIT. See Letter. (Black4)

LITERAE - Letters. A term applied in old English law to various instruments in writing, public
and private. (Black4)

LITERAL - ACCORDING TO LANGUAGE; FOLLOWING EXPRESSION IN WORDS. A

literal construction of a document adheres closely to its words, without making differences
for extrinsic circumstances; a literal performance of a condition is one which complies exactly
with its terms. (Black4)

LITERAL - adjective - [Latin litera, a letter.] 1. ACCORDING TO THE LETTER; PRIMITIVE;

REAL; NOT FIGURATIVE OR METAPHORICAL; as the literal meaning of a phrase. 2.
FOLLOWING THE LETTER OR EXACT WORDS; NOT FREE; as a literal translation. 3.
Consisting of letters. The literal notation of numbers was known to Europeans before the
ciphers. - noun - Literal meaning. (Webs1828)

LITERALLY - adverb - 1. According to the primary and natural import OF WORDS; NOT
FIGURATIVELY. A man and his wife CANNOT BE LITERALLY ONE FLESH. 2. With close
adherence to words; word by word. So wild and ungovernable a poet cannot be translated
literally. (Webs1828)

!462
 LITERALISM - noun - That which accords with the letter. (Webs1828)

LITERAL PROOF - In the civil law. WRITTEN EVIDENCE. (Black4)

LITERATE - In English ecclesiastical law. One who qualiÞes himself for holy orders BY
PRESENTING HIMSELF AS A PERSON ACCOMPLISHED IN CLASSICAL LEARNING,
etc., not as a graduate of Oxford, Cambridge, etc. (Black4)

LITERATURA - "Ad Literaturam ponere" means TO PUT CHILDREN TO SCHOOL. THIS

LIBERTY WAS ANCIENTLY DENIED TO THOSE PARENTS WHO WERE SERVILE
TENANTS, WITHOUT THE LORD'S CONSENT. The prohibition against the education of
sons arose from the fear that the son, being bred to letters, might enter into holy orders,
AND SO STOP OR DIVERT THE SERVICES WHICH HE MIGHT OTHERWISE DO AS
HEIR TO HIS FATHER. (Black4)

—=—

Quite simply, men are not Free because they take their name and title in persona (Þctional, legal
status) literally. Men identify themselves by the words (nouns) of corporations (artiÞcial persons)
and thus obey the words of men over the Word (Law) of Jehovah, to which no words can do justice.
The danger of literal thought placed upon what is areobviously
obviouslymetaphoric
metaphoricwords
wordscannot
cannotbebeunder-
under-
stated here. And yet this is the exact foundational trickery of the church and state, which are built
of nothing but artful words and symbology. As the “unwritten Law,” to take the words of the Bible
literally is no less than a fools paradise. For the term unwritten necessarily equates to no words, and
thus no litera (letters)! No greater fallacy has ever been put forward than the literal interpretation
that the Bible is “God’s Word.” But how can the unwritten Law (Word) of Nature be made out of
the artful words of men? Answer: it cannot. Only the legal matrix, not Nature, is made of words.
Jehovah is not art, and no amount of literal proof (written words) for or against It will change Its
True Nature.

To give but one example, the honey bee does not go from ßower to ßower in its habitation because
of any words of man, but because the Word of God (Laws of Nature) compels it. Those who read
God’s Word literally are inadvertently worshipers of the valuation of words in mammon, not of the
spiritual and self-evident Nature of them. The Word is not to be read and memorized, but to be
Lived in through the spirit of self-actualization.

It took me a very long time to understand this point. And itÕs quite simple once the Truth is Þnally
seen. Getting there is a monster of a journey, one I hope is made easier by this recording of my own
experiences. You see, when the Bible is said to be “inspired” by God, this is not to be mistaken for
the Luciferian notion of channelling spirits or demons. Quite the opposite, in fact… For to be in-
spired by God (as Jehovah) is to be inspired by what is the self-Evident, self-Existent Truth. Jehovah
is simply the Pure and untainted Truth. To be inspired by Jehovah is to be inspired to write the
Truth of all things. There is no man that has not the capacity to write into his own words the self-
evidence of Jehovah and Its (Nature’s) Law. It is not a mystery, not occulted, and certainly not a
secret. Thus no man carries immunity from understanding the Law of Nature, of Life Itself. How-
ever, the transliterators of kings and empires may certainly re-write such allegorical stories and
parables into a language designed for the illiteracy of its users, such as our dog-Latin English.

The literalist is not unlike the historian or the genealogist, his thoughts so stuck in the Romantic
timelines and value domains that True wisdom may never be obtained without folly or until it is
too late, for True wisdom lies only in the Higher consciousness, the Higher Law. He who would
physically squeeze a turnip to verify that no blood will gush forth is Truly an educated, science-
driven idiot. Honestly, I can think of nothing less self-evident than man’s recorded tales of history.
Nothing is more embellished towards the side of the victors (and vicars) than the historic retelling
of such long-lost ages and generations. And yet the literalist has such faith in his fabled histories
that he does not recognize even his own fallacious belief (love) in them as a false sense of Reality.

!463
He does not realize how history Þxes the mind to accept the current history being made every day
based on nothing but the supporting propaganda of the history of yesterday. And this is the battle
between reasonable spirituality and pure logic without such Higher, Truth-driven reason. For
history above all things is used to justify the most heinous of modern crimes.

For the reader, the above paragraph was my own attempt at personiÞcation in moral storytelling.
In other words, I made a fabled or parabolic though unnamed ÒmanÓ out of the concept of
literalism; as Òthe literalist man.Ó This is a personiÞcation of literalism, just as christ is similarly a
personiÞcation of a man acting purely and with utter Piety under GodÕs Word (Law). Yet we know
that this word literal is certainly not a Life form of any kind. And so, in cosmic irony, the stubborn
literalist who might be reading this just read a parable about himself and about any and all literalist
thought patterns. He may take it personally or he may learn from this parable and embrace it for its
Loving intent. And so the riddle of the parable always presents itself by invoking the following
question:

Is this a Real story?

To the public person that insists upon his class order in this great and horrendous nation as any-
thing but that of the nature of a goyim in commonalty as human capital and as the live-stock of
private share-holders, one should take into mind the following words of a once well-established
and often quoted capitalist:

—=—

“We have stricken the (slave) shackles from four million human beings
and brought all laborers to a common level not so much by the elevation
of former slaves as BY PRACTICALLY REDUCING THE WHOLE
WORKING POPULATION, WHITE AND BLACK, TO A CONDITION
OF SERFDOM. While boasting of our noble deeds, we are careful to
conceal the ugly fact that by an iniquitous money system we have
NATIONALIZED A SYSTEM OF OPPRESSION which, though more
reÞned, is not less cruel than the old system of chattel slavery.”
--Horace Greeley (1811-1872), founder of the New York Tribune, speaking on post-civil war or ‘14th amendment’ citizenship

—=—

In other words, slavery went national! All slaves were taken from their private holders and
transferred (denizened) into the nativity of that national holding company called as the United
States district, a public slave colony. And this was romantically called as the free-dom known
privately as corporate enfranchisement. And here they were all placed onto equalized ships,
persons (legal status) that caused all publicly acting men to be classiÞed as ÒvoluntaryÓ slaves. For
only Òinvoluntary slaveryÓ was abolished by the 13th amendment to the constitution. Volunteers
are welcomed with open Arms, that is, as long as we abandon the Arms of our own blood-right.

Like plucking a ßower from its roots in Nature and placing it into a vase for vain display, the
notion of citizen-ship is Þguratively the act of de-Naturing a man. The man, like the ßower, is
placed into an artiÞcial atmosphere (a legal matrix, as an artiÞcial protective womb), which once
within is called his vessel or ship. The ßower is no longer actually alive, no longer rooted to the
land. Like that ßower, the man exists only in a seemingly present state of life, as suspended
animation that is actually a spiritual death of artiÞcially forced civil life. And so the ßower and the
man, in this deadened state of artiÞcially induced life, may no longer give birth to new Life at law,

!464
for both of their seeds are also considered as following the spiritually dead status of their parents,
their Life-force (blood) Þguratively ceasing to ßow. And so the intention of the issue (heir) in law is
lost by this pretended, legal corruption of blood. In order for a man to be incorporated into the
government of manÕs Þction, he or she must be enfranchised (de-Natured) into a Þctional character.
The more accurate term to describe this action of being Þctionally formed into citizen-ship is to be
Òdenizened.Ó

As we uncover the legal meanings of these words, our collective and horriÞc Truth as public
persons reveals itself as exactly what Mr. Greeley spoke to aboveÉ

DENIZEN - noun - 1. In England, AN ALIEN WHO IS MADE A SUBJECT BY THE KINGS

LETTERS PATENT, HOLDING A MIDDLE STATE BETWEEN AN ALIEN AND A
NATURAL BORN SUBJECT. HE MAY TAKE LAND BY PURCHASE OR DEVISE, WHICH
AN ALIEN CANNOT; BUT HE CANNOT TAKE BY INHERITANCE. 2. A STRANGER
ADMITTED TO RESIDENCE AND CERTAIN RIGHTS IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY. Ye
gods, Natives, or denizens, of blest abodes. 3. A CITIZEN. (Webs1828)

(TO) DENIZEN - verb transitive - To make a denizen; TO ADMIT TO RESIDENCE WITH

CERTAIN RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES; TO INFRANCHISE. (Webs1828)

—=—

The word denizen, in its modern usage, is derived from the early 15th century, from Anglo-French
deinzein, from deinz "within, inside," from Late Latin deintus, from de- "from" added to intus
"within" (see ento-). Historically, AN ALIEN ADMITTED TO CERTAIN RIGHTS OF
CITIZENSHIP; A NATURALIZED CITIZEN.

And here is where perspective comes into play. Remember that the private People (States) created
the United States and are foreign to it and to each other. And so the private People are not citizens
of the United States, only of their own private, territorial place (noun). Likewise, a person of the
United States is not a citizen of any private State, but rather a denizen, a foreign alien in a strange,
legal realm of a Þctional purgatory. The creator is simply never a subject of its own creation, a king
never bound under his own sovereignly declared law. And so all public, United States citizenships
(as public persons) are actually aliens in each State they reside within, allowed temporary but Þxed
residence only (not domicile) in each state government jurisdiction as agents of the United States,
while retaining domicile only in CaesarÕs district of the United States municipal (dummy) holding
company. As foreigners (aliens), we are allowed to inhabit the lands (territories) of the several
(private) States (People) only as tenants and renters, but never as the actual holders of the actual
land within that political state boundary, for we are not the private People of any State, only public
personas of the district in municipal incorporation called Washington DC. As denizens (citizens)
we may take land and property by purchase and by various devilish, unnatural devices of debt, but
we may never obtain the patented (invented) perfection of allodial title to that land as foreign
citizen-ships (denizens). We are not the People of any State and so cannot hold the lands of any
State. In other words, we cannot dispose of the land. We have no Real stake (cross) in that land but
those superÞcially contracted to our strawman in usufruct. And the only reason we even have these
ÒrightsÓ to temporarily, jurisdictionally remain dwelling therein is because we are operating in that
vessel called a public United States citizen-ship, a Þctional creation of those States (People). We are,
in other words, under absolute control even as we pretend to be Free. We owe allegiance to those
People as denizens and as common people under a sovereign People (Union of States). And so
from the perspective of 99.99% of the actual area we call as the united States of America, ÒUnited
StatesÓ districted citizen-ships only have domicile in that small district of New Columbia, that city
(municipal corporation) on a hill. It is not the land we tread upon but the artiÞcial jurisdiction of
the United States extended into those States for commercial purposes only. We operate under the
commercial (unconstitutional) law of the nation. None of us are actually grounded or attached
Naturally or by Law to the ground (territory) of any State. Perspective always must be clear. For it

!465
was the People, through their created principality, that denizened us into nativity as voluntary
subjects through word trickery. Thus, these private People we publicly pledge feudalistic allegiance
to through the “United States” is the god of each of our strawmen. For only persons are denizens
and citizenships, not men. A denizen is just a noun (name).

DENIZEN - noun - 1. An inhabitant; occupant; RESIDENT. 2. (British) an individual

permanently resident in a foreign country where he enjoys certain rights of citizenship. 3. A
plant or ANIMAL ESTABLISHED IN A PLACE TO WHICH IT IS NOT NATIVE. 4. A
naturalized foreign word. - verb - 5. (Transitive) to make a denizen. (Collins English Dictionary
2012 Digital Edition Online)

DENIZEN - An alien BORN who has obtained ex donatione regis LETTERS-PATENT TO

MAKE HIM A SUBJECT. Whence denizenize, denizenation or denization, and denizenship.
The crown denizenizes; parliament consents to naturalization. A DENIZEN IS IN A KIND
OF MIDDLE STATE BETWEEN AN ALIEN AND A NATURAL-BORN SUBJECT, AND
PARTAKES OF BOTH. HE MAY TAKE LANDS BY PURCHASE OR DEVISE, BUT NOT BY
INHERITANCE — FOR THE PARENT HAS NO INHERITABLE BLOOD. But since 1870, in
England, an alien may hold and dispose of property as a natural-born subject. In South
Carolina the status seems to have been CREATED BY LAW. (WCA1889)

—=—

It should be noted here that Dante’s travels in Milton’s novel named the inhabitants of all the
circles and realms of hell to be the “denizens of hell.” This is no misprint, for Dante’s tour of hell
was a visit with the very souls that could only have sinned through the artiÞce of legalism. They
are in hell voluntarily. Their lusts and crimes could only be satiated with the artful, dead things of
mammon. And their stay in hell, including the supposed dwelling of Mohamed in the eighth circle
for leading men away from christianity, was only possible through their love of the artiÞce and not
God. Oh, and all the Popes were there too! And did I mention that barrators (attorneys/agents/
those standing in political corruption) were perpetually boiled in tar? We must realize that this
allegorical tale full of metaphor and parabolic story-telling is meant to cause us to realize the error
of our ways in Real Life. We should not fear hell as the place after this Life but as the place we have
ourselves either created or allowed to be created around us and over Nature, both of these (the act
and the silence) being quite equal crimes, though deserving of a dwelling within different circles of
hell. But this debtor’s hell is actually upon us, and we are already its willing denizens. Resistance
in its own legal formality and format is futile, but the substance of Nature that leads to escape is
not. We simply need to become men again, abandoning the denizen (citizen/status) that chains us
in surety and pledge to this debtor’s prison of legal hell in mammon. We must cease operating in
the false light and embrace Truth. The solution is not some legal document Þled in the courts of one
of its artiÞcial magistrates, as if anything we may say in person (as prisoners) or in the agency
thereof can free us from that hellish condition and character. The solution is only to be found in
walking the spiritual path back to Heaven on Earth. No words may save us, only the Word (Law/
Son), for only the Reality (God) of all things may deliver us from evil (artiÞce).

I cannot believe I am saying this, and I certainly never thought I would, as I have always lived in
my own circular trap in the Þction of this legal hell. I am truly humbled, and hope the reader might
Þnd in these words what I have.

But how does this word deni-zen reconcile with the word citi-zen? For they are deÞned as one and
the same concept! A citizen is literally denizened into the bonds of nativity at birth or
naturalization. For remember, we are only speaking of Þction here, not of men. The man is only
agent in surety for the person (strawman). He acts the part and appears and does commerce in its
id-entity. It is only the surety bond to the person, the strawman, we are speaking of. Never forget
that this is all a big lie that we’ve been brainwashed to accept by trickery in approbation and
respect of every day commercial life. What is hell but this, but dwelling in the artiÞce of manÕs
design, in this legal matrix? While the word denizen denotes the action (verb) of admission as an

!466
enfranchised (incorporated) citizen, the Þnal result of denizen-ship is a secured surety to a citizen-
ship (person/commercial vessel). This act of enfranchising (in-franchising) means that the surname
of the birthed and certiÞed person is patented (letters patent) and imaginarily conjoined to the man
in conÞrmation by his actions in agency as the bonded surety, while all rights and privileges of the
man under negative, Natural Law Þguratively cease to Exist. For remember, nothing in Nature (of
Jehovah) Exists in the Þction. Only the name exists Ñ the big lie, the representation, the false and
vain mirror image.

This enfranchisement, as we read above, means that the man may only purchase property through
the surname belonging to the district (state), but the man has no inheritable blood because he or
she gave up that right of inheritance when the enfranchisement (personiÞcation) took place. This
right to bear Arms of the family is given up through denizenship, because there is no blood or
family in the Þction of common, public persons. Every Þctional person has and can have only one
father, which is the state (creator) as parens patria (parent of the state) that patented its letters Ñ the
creator and controller of the legal status called a person.

The act of becoming (manifesting) a citizen-ship, whether ÒnaturallyÓ or Ònaturalized,Ó equals the
act of becoming incorporated as part of a larger body politic. It means giving up individuality to
become E Pluribus Unum (out of many, one). It is a symbolic sacriÞce of the State of sentient Being,
ceremonially killing the Real man so that the artiÞcial phoenix may rise.

Being a citizen is like being in purgatoryÉ This middle state between alien and natural born subject
perfectly describes the US and other citizenships of today. But how exactly does citizenship
happen? No mystery thereÉ ItÕs just incorporation; the admixing of names; the taking of the mark
of artiÞciality (synthesis) by accepting false, legal id-entity; as the abandonment of Jehovah and Its
Natural Law. This is voluntary nativity, or what you might call the antithesis of christÕs story; for
citizenship (noun) is acting antichirst (verb)! This is again not religious nonsense, it is Law! For a
citizen (person) is the native and resident of a city. ChristÕs entire purpose was to drive good and
pious men away from the cities (as Þctional, legal jurisdictions fulÞlling only manÕs own municipal
laws), and even the Old Testament gave these warnings.

—=—

“Flee, SAVE YOUR LIVES, and be like the heath in the wilderness…
And the spoiler shall come upon EVERY CITY, AND NO CITY SHALL
ESCAPE… FOR THE CITIES THEREOF SHALL BE DESOLATE,
WITHOUT ANY TO DWELL THEREIN… O ye that dwell in Moab,
LEAVE THE CITIES, and dwell in the rock, and be like the dove that
maketh her nest in the sides of the hole's mouth.”
—Jeremiah 48: 6, 8-9, KJB

—=—

Let us break down these terms of art continuously taken for granted by denizened slaves that never
grasp their own voluntary dis-position of servitude. For as we shall see, a free slave is merely a
slave without chains, but one still bound to a plantation (colony). The freedom of franchise is
limited by the law of the master and principal of that granted status. To be free in America, in other
words, in terms of art, is to be conquered (purchased) and enfranchised (set free) into the invisible
chains of personhood, and burdened with the mark (number) of a beast of burden as human
capital. To roam as if free within a cage or jurisdiction is not True Natural Freedom, only the
appearance and simulation of it. The United States is naught but an open-air prison!

!467
 CITIZEN - noun - 1. The NATIVE of a city, or an INHABITANT who ENJOYS the
FREEDOM and PRIVILEGES OF THE CITY IN WHICH HE RESIDES; THE FREEMAN OF
A CITY, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM A FOREIGNER, OR ONE NOT ENTITLED TO ITS
FRANCHISES. 2. A townsman; A MAN OF TRADE; NOT A GENTLEMAN. 3. An
inhabitant; a dweller in any city, town or place. 4. In general sense, a native or PERMANENT
RESIDENT in a city or country; as the citizens of London or Philadelphia; THE CITIZENS
OF THE UNITED STATES. 5. In the United States, A PERSON, NATIVE OR
NATURALIZED, who has the privilege of exercising the ELECTIVE FRANCHISE, or the
qualiÞcations which enable him TO VOTE FOR RULERS, and to purchase and hold real
estate. If the citizens of the United States should not be free and happy, the fault will be
entirely their own. - adjective - Having the QUALITIES of a citizen. (Webs1828)

CITIZENIZE - verb transitive - To MAKE a citizen; TO ADMIT TO THE RIGHTS AND

PRIVILEGES OF A CITIZEN. (Webs1828)

CITIZENSHIP - noun - The STATE OF BEING VESTED with the rights and privileges of a
citizen. (Webs1828)

VESTED - participle passive - 1. Clothed; covered; closely encompassed. 2. - adjective - FIXED;

not in a state of contingency or suspension; as vested rights. (Webs1828)

INCORPORATED - participle passive - MIXED OR UNITED IN ONE BODY; associated in

the same political body; UNITED IN A LEGAL BODY. (Webs1828)

INCORPORATE - adjective - [in and corporate.] 1. Not consisting of matter; not having a
material body. [Little used.] 2. MIXED; UNITED IN ONE BODY; associated. - verb transitive -
[Latin incorporo; in and corpus, a body.]… 3. To unite; to blend; TO WORK INTO ANOTHER
MASS OR BODY; as, to incorporate plagiarisms into one's own composition. 4. To unite; to
associate in another government or empire. THE ROMANS INCORPORATED
CONQUERED COUNTRIES INTO THEIR GOVERNMENT. 5. To embody; to give a
material form to. THE IDOLATERS, who worshiped their images as gods, supposed some
spirit to be incorporated therein. 6. TO FORM INTO A LEGAL BODY, OR BODY POLITIC;
TO CONSTITUTE A BODY, composed of one or more individuals, with the quality of
PERPETUAL EXISTENCE or succession, unless limited by the act of incorporation; as, TO
INCORPORATE THE INHABITANTS OF A CITY, TOWN OR PARISH; to incorporate the
proprietors of a bridge, the stockholders of a bank, of an insurance company, etc. New Haven
was incorporated in January 1784; Hartford in May 1784. - verb intransitive - To unite so as TO
MAKE A PART OF ANOTHER BODY; to be mixed or blended; to grow into, etc…
(Webs1828)

CORPORATE - adjective - [Latin, to be shaped into a body, body.] 1. UNITED IN A BODY,

OR COMMUNITY, as a number of individuals, who are empowered (enfranchised) TO
TRANSACT BUSINESS AS AN INDIVIDUAL; FORMED INTO A BODY; as a
CORPORATE assembly, or society; a CORPORATE town. 2. UNITED; GENERAL;
COLLECTIVELY ONE. THEY ANSWER IN A CORPORATE VOICE. (Webs1828)

—=—

Notice here that the word “man” is not used to describe a citizen, except to say towns-man or man
of something in artiÞce. Man must be renamed (re-nouned) as inhabitant, dweller, native, resident,
person, freeman, etcÉ In the Þction, man does not exist and is not considered, for man is anti-Þction,
pro-Nature, as to be pro-action (charitable works). Reality must be renamed and redeÞned as
something it is not in order to live (evil) within the Þction (lie). From I am to I am Þctional.

Inversely, the words form, shape, quality, not matter, not material, material form, idolatry, image, legal
body, constitute, and body politic are here used to describe something purely Þctional Ñ a thing

!468
(noun/name/title) with no actual substance. A citizen is some thing that is not a man but that is
attached to the man so as to enfranchise the man, mixing, uniting, blending, and thus incorporating
the man into a corrupted Þctional thing. ItÕs like a human cocktail!

—=—

“FOR OUR CONVERSATION (G4175 - politeuma = “CITIZENSHIP”)

IS IN HEAVEN; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord
Jesus Christ…”
—Philippians 3:20, KJB

—=—

This word Òconversation,Ó translated as StrongÕs G4174 - politeuma, carries the meaning of “(1) the
administration of civil affairs or of a commonwealth, (2) the constitution of a commonwealth,
form of government and the laws by which it is administered, and (3) a state, commonwealth:
the commonwealth of citizens.”

Here again, it is unreasonable to consider that this metaphoric reference to Living in heaven (as our
only domain) is something only attainable after our physical death, in some ethereal “afterlife.”
What would the example of christ be to man without the temple of the body upon this heavenly
Earth (Creation)? What purpose would christ have served if his purpose and Law was not intended
to be followed in this eternity of Life on Earth? What the church teaches is patently ludicrous, a
design of false doctrine drawing us away from this True wisdom and spiritual Life teaching, away
from our own heaven on Earth. But most importantly, as the creator of the civil law, the church
seeks us all to live only civil (artiÞcial), legally controllable lives.

We are either a vessel of God in Nature (heaven) or a vessel of Caesar in mammon (debtorÕs hell).
Thus our city is either the entirety and eternity of Earth or the corporate limits of some jurisdiction
of man. A follower of the Son (Word/Law) has no capacity for citizenship but that of Being a vessel
for God. All else is Þction (sin/syn).

The word citizen, in its modern usage, is derived from the early 14th century, as "inhabitant of a
city," from Anglo-French citezein (spelling subsequently altered, probably by inßuence of denizen),
from Old French citeien "city-dweller, town-dweller, citizen.”

But itÕs ok! DonÕt worry. We get to choose our rulers through the voting franchise! And that some-
how makes everything right as rain, now doesnÕt it, being able to choose between two potential
gods? Left or right? Choosing a ruler (dictator of law) is no different from not choosing (electing) in
the end. The results are the same, and the same bloodline will rule regardless of consent. For the
rulers rule over persons (voters), and this fact alone makes them the ruler of men who allow them-
selves and their blood consideration to be Þctionally corrupted by attaching their good name with
the surname of the nation (father). The right and the left are part of the same central power. Right is
merely the mirror image of left, while the source of these political simulations remains hidden.

So what does it mean to be an inhabitant? Can a man inhabit a Þctional space? Of course not. The
man must possess the Þctional, Ònatural personÓ as if he were a demon taking over some golem, so
as to be denizened into the Þctional realm of this debtorÕs hell. Thus, the man is renamed (re-
nouned) and thus re-invented (through letters patent), being redeÞned as an inhabitant, a resident,
and a dweller. These are the titles that must be shed for a man to reclaim his inheritable blood, for
the blood only ßows when man is undeÞned, standing only as man ofof
a man God
Godwith
withnothing
nothingelse inin
else
addition — the I am…

!469
Of course, not all titles are actually ßattering. The word ßattering merely represents a change of
status, be it good or bad in perspective. But all titles are evil according to scripture, for titles
necessarily create inequity amongst men, serving only the purpose of escape from GodÕs Law of
Nature, elevating and dividing one or some unnaturally from all others and falsely allowing those
elevated to break with that Highest Moral Law. God respects no titles, no names, and no persons,
for these are not of Its Nature, not part of the Truth, not I am.

INHABITANT - noun - A DWELLER; ONE WHO DWELLS OR RESIDES permanently in a

place, or who has A FIXED RESIDENCE, as distinguished from an occasional lodger or
visitor; as the inhabitant of a house or cottage; the inhabitants of a town, city, county or state.
SO BRUTE ANIMALS ARE INHABITANTS OF THE REGIONS TO WHICH THEIR
NATURES ARE ADAPTED; AND WE SPEAK OF SPIRITUAL BEINGS, AS
INHABITANTS OF HEAVEN. 1. One who has a LEGAL SETTLEMENT in a town, city or
parish. The conditions or qualiÞcations WHICH CONSTITUTE A PERSON AN
INHABITANT of a town or parish, so as to subject the town or parish to support him, if a
pauper, are deÞned by the statutes of different governments or states. (Webs1828)

RESIDENT - noun - DWELLING OR HAVING AN ABODE in a place for a continuance of

time, BUT NOT DEFINITE; as a minister resident at the court of St. James. A B is now resident
in South America. 1. One who RESIDES OR DWELLS in a place for some time. A B is now a
resident in London. 2. A public minister who resides at a foreign court. It is usually applied to
ministers of a rank inferior to that of embassadors. (Webs1828)

RESIDENCE - noun - 1. The act of abiding or DWELLING in a place for some continuance of
TIME; as the residence of an American in France or Italy for a year. The confessor had often
made considerable residences in Normandy. 2. The place of abode; A DWELLING; a
habitation. Caprea had been - the residence of Tiberius for several years. 3. That which falls to
the bottom of liquors. Obs. 4. In the canon and common law, THE ABODE OF A PERSON or
incumbent on his beneÞce; opposed to non-residence. (Webs1828)

DOMICIL - noun - [Latin. A mansion.] An abode or mansion; A PLACE OF PERMANENT

RESIDENCE, either of an individual or family; a residence, animo manendi. (Webs1828)

CONSTITUTE - verb transitive - [Latin. To set.] 1. To set; to Þx; to enact; to establish. WE

MUST OBEY LAWS APPOINTED AND CONSTITUTED BY LAWFUL AUTHORITY, NOT
AGAINST THE LAW OF GOD. 2. To form or compose; TO GIVE FORMAL EXISTENCE
TO; to make a THING what it is... 3. To appoint, depute or elect to an ofÞce or employment;
to make (create) and empower. A sheriff is constituted a conservator of the peace. A has
constituted B his ATTORNEY or AGENT. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is perhaps important to note here that a citizen, a denizen, an inhabitant, a dweller, and a resident
are all an unnatural title or status granted by the men in ofÞce of government (control) that created
them. Thus, they all must be constituted (created) under the legal code. In other words, they are
Þctional, being in existence not of or by God nor therefore bound to the duty or protection of the
Natural Law.

DWELLER - noun - An inhabitant; a resident of some continuance in a place. (Webs1828)

DWELL - verb intransitive - pret. dwelled, usually CONTRACTED INTO DWELT. [See Dally.]
1. To abide as a permanent resident, or to inhabit for a time; to live in a place; to have a
habitation for some time or permanence. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the
tents of Shem. Gen 9. Dwell imports a residence of some continuance. We use abide for the
resting of a night or an hour; but we never say, he dwelt in a place a day or a night. Dwell may 




!470
 signify a residence for life or for a much shorter period, but not for a day. In scripture, it
denotes a residence of seven days during the feast of tabernacles. Ye shall dwell in booths
seven days. Lev 23. THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH, AND DWELT AMONG US. John 1.
(Webs1828)

ABIDE - verb intransitive pert. and part. - Abode, abada, to be, or EXIST, TO CONTINUE; bod,
to be; to dwell, rest, continue, stand Þrm, or be stationary for anytime indeÞnitely. Class Bd.
No 7.] 1. To rest, or dwell. Gen 29:19. 2. To tarry or stay for a short time. Gen 24:55. 3. To
continue permanently or IN THE SAME STATE; to be Þrm and immovable. Psalms 119:90. 4.
To remain, to continue. Acts 27:31. Eccl 8:15. - verb intransitive - 1. To wait for; to be prepared
for; to await. Bonds and afßictions abide me. Acts 20:23. In general, abide by signiÞes to
adhere to, maintain defend, or stand to, as to abide by a promise, or by a friend; or to suffer
the consequences, AS TO ABIDE BY THE EVENT, THAT IS, TO BE FIXED OR
PERMANENT IN A PARTICULAR CONDITION. (Webs1828)

GOVERNMENT - noun - Direction; regulation. These precepts will serve for the government
of our conduct. 1. Control; restraint. Men are apt to neglect the government of their temper
and passions. 2. The exercise of authority; DIRECTION AND RESTRAINT EXERCISED
OVER THE ACTIONS OF MEN IN COMMUNITIES, SOCIETIES OR STATES; the
administration of PUBLIC affairs, according to established constitution, laws and usages, or
by arbitrary edicts. Prussia rose to importance under the government of Frederick II. 3. THE
EXERCISE OF AUTHORITY BY A PARENT OR HOUSEHOLDER. Children are often
ruined by a neglect of government (direction, control, and restraint) in parents. LET FAMILY
GOVERNMENT BE LIKE THAT OF OUR HEAVENLY FATHER, MILD, GENTLE AND
AFFECTIONATE. 4. The system of polity in a state; that form of fundamental rules and
principles by which a nation or state is governed, or by which individual members of a body
politic are to regulate their social actions; a constitution, either written or unwritten, by
which the rights and duties of citizens and public ofÞcers are prescribed and deÞned; as a
monarchial government, or a republican government. THIRTEEN GOVERNMENTS THUS
FOUNDED ON THE NATURAL AUTHORITY OF THE PEOPLE ALONE, WITHOUT THE
PRETENSE OF MIRACLE OR MYSTERY, are a great point gained in favor of the RIGHTS
OF MANKIND. 5. An empire, kingdom or state; ANY TERRITORY OVER WHICH THE
RIGHT OF SOVEREIGNTY IS EXTENDED. 6. The right of governing or administering the
laws. The king of England vested the government of Ireland in the lord lieutenant. 7. THE
PERSONS OR COUNCIL WHICH ADMINISTER THE LAWS OF A KINGDOM OR
STATE; EXECUTIVE POWER. 8. Manageableness; compliance; obsequiousness. (Webs1828)

—=—

Take note here that these terms of dwelling in legalese all have to do with the artiÞcial time domain
of the Roman calendar, and so aren’t inheritable concepts of blood as recognized by law.

The origin of the word dwell is perhaps one of the most interesting of all these artful terms that
have been twisted into legalese and normalized to appear as a good thing. If we stop to consider
that one may legally dwell only within some districted, legal, artiÞcial domicile and residence in
any state or nation by license, we may understand that only he who is not right-minded, or he who
has been made public-minded from public education and entertainment, would possibly “dwell”
anywhere that is not the Reality of Nature. To dwell in any church or state is insanity, for all of
these are Þctions! And all legal persons, places, and things, including dwellings, are merely words
on paper titles. But then, where else might a strawman live but in Þction?

The verb dwell is of course an action. In Old English the word dwellan meant "TO MISLEAD,
DECEIVE," and originally "TO MAKE A FOOL OF, LEAD ASTRAY,” from Proto-Germanic
dwelan "TO GO OR LEAD ASTRAY,” sourced also from Old Norse dvöl "delay," dvali "SLEEP;"
Middle Dutch dwellen "to stun, make giddy, perplex;" Old High German twellen "TO HINDER,
DELAY;" Danish dvale "TRANCE, STUPOR," dvaelbær "narcotic berry," and from Middle English

!471
dwale "nightshade"), from PIE dhwel- as an extension form of the root dheu- meaning (1) "dust,
cloud, vapor, smoke,” with related notions of a "DEFECTIVE PERCEPTION OR WITS"). Dwell is
also related to the Old English gedweola, meaning “ERROR, HERESY, MADNESS." Its sense
shifted in Middle English through "hinder, delay," to "LINGER" circa 1200, used still in the
modern phrase to dwell upon), and also to "MAKE A HOME" from the mid-13th century.

And so the modern, stupeÞed, foolish, entranced, totally lead astray public citizenship of nations is
called as a dweller. The word dweller stems from the late 14th century, a noun used as an agent of
the word dwell. So a dweller is one who dwells, one who has been or causes another to be dwelt, or
is currently dwelled. This is the perplexed state of the common public of the nation in residence. A
dwelling is of course a verbal noun from the 14th century meaning a ÒPLACE OF RESIDENCE,”
as one of the deceived whom makes a home in the Þctional person (incorporation) and on the lands
of another in rent. And of course the verbal noun indwelling, carries the meaning of one in the
“ACT OF RESIDING,” considering Wycliff’s translation of the Latin inhabitatio, as the present
participle of the obsolete indwell, from in (adjective) + dwell (verb). He also used indweller for
Latin inhabitans and indwell (verb) for inhabitare.

For good measure, we can see that the word habit (verb) comes from the mid 14th century, and
carries the meaning of "to dwell, reside; dwell in" (obsolete), from Old French habit or abiter "TO
DWELL, inhabit; have dealings with," from Latin habitare "to live, dwell; stay, remain," and is
frequentative of habere "to have, to hold, possess.” Its noun form, from the early 13th century,
carries the meaning of "characteristic attire of a religious or clerical order," from 12th century Old
French habit, abit "clothing, (ecclesiastical) habit; CONDUCT" and from the Latin habitus
"condition, demeanor, APPEARANCE, dress…” The meaning of "clothing generally" is from late
14th century, and the form of "CUSTOMARY PRACTICE, USUAL MODE OF ACTION" is early
14th century. And I would certainly agree that the habits of the priest class, of the law society of
judges, and of kings, queens, and popes are a sure sign of their own dwelling in madness!

Naturally, this leads us to the word inhabit, a verb from late 14th century Old French enhabiter,
enabiter "dwell in, live in, RESIDE" and from Latin inhabitare "to dwell in," from in- + habitare "to
dwell," frequentative of habere "hold, have.”

Of course, this leads us to the noun domicile, taken from mid-15th century English, from Middle
French domicile in the 14th century, from Latin domicilium, perhaps from domus "house" (domestic)
+ colere "TO DWELL" (colony), and Þrst attested as a verb in 1809.

The verb to domesticate stems from the 1630s, of animals, and 1741, of persons, meaning "to cause
to be attached to home and family;" from Medieval Latin domesticatus, past participle of domesticare
"to tame," literally "TO DWELL IN A HOUSE," from domesticus (domestic). This relates to being
domesticated and to domesticating persons and animals, and it is safe to say that citizenships are
required to be properly domesticated animals.

And Þnally, we Þnd the word bound (adjective) to carry the meaning of "ready to go," c. 1200, boun,
from Old Norse buinn past participle of bua "to prepare," also "TO DWELL, TO LIVE," from Proto-
Germanic bowan (source also of Old High German buan "to dwell," Old Danish both "dwelling,
stall"), from PIE root bheue- "TO BE, EXIST, DWELL.”

Here we Þnd the root for the noun bondage circa the 1300s as the "CONDITION OF A SERF OR
SLAVE," from Anglo-Latin bondagium, from Middle English bond "A SERF, TENANT FARMER,"
from Old English bonda "HOUSEHOLDER," from Old Norse boandi "FREE-BORN FARMER," and
as the noun use of present participle of boa "DWELL, prepare, INHABIT.” Its meaning in English
changed by the inßuence of bond.

It is interesting to note here the use of the word and image of the rose in the English civil wars of
the 15th century, where the white rose was the badge (Arms) of the House of York, the red rose the
badge (Arms) of its rival Lancaster. As Þgurative symbols representing these Òhouses” or family

!472
bloodlines, we again come back to the word dwell, as to dwell under the colored rose. In the 15th
century, to be (or dwell) in ßowers meant to "be prosperous, ßourish,” leading much later to the
notion of coming up roses as a sign of coming out ahead.

And so, in other words, to be fooled and falsely exist in any type or form of Þction is to dwell in
that artiÞce, be it poverty or wealth, nobility or servitude to nobles. ItÕs all just the art of manÕs
imagination. It is the realm of fools, and many men are very successful in their dwellings. But they
are certainly no men of God, though they may devilishly call themselves as ÒChristians.Ó Hell, even
the clothing of a priest, his habit, means only that he dwells in the delusions of his own priest-hood
and teachings that are likely nothing of christ.

In fact, we can even see that Vesta, the Roman goddess of hearth and home, corresponds to and is
perhaps in cognate with the Greek Hestia, from hestia "hearth," from PIE root wes- "TO DWELL,
STAY" (source also of Sanskrit vasati "stays, DWELLS," Gothic wisan, Old English, Old High
German wesan ÒTO BE”).

You canÕt make this stuff up!

Dude, weÕve all been totally dwelled!

But there is a solution. Stop allowing your Self being fooled. Stop volunteering. Stop being a
resident. Stop dwelling in art. Stop sucking from the teat of CaesarÕs district. Stop loving (believing
in) Þction over Reality. Stop playing the part assigned to you in the agency of a false persona. Stop
believing (loving) the idols of the nations. Either that or embrace the fact that youÕve been master-
fully dwelt (deceived) and go on legally existing and continue playing the fool, ignoring scripture
(Law) and embracing all that is the artiÞce while pretending a national ÒChristianÓ faith in purely
vain ßattery. That is the American way, after all. Simply remain plugged into this legal matrix and
take the marks you will be required to soon take as a world citizen (denizens of hell). Simple, at
least for those who have a defective perception and wit.

Let us be clear that for all the hoopla and pomp and circumstance there is only one government
over the United States, which is the executive ÒBranch.Ó Executive means that by military force the
laws are administered. Congress creates laws, and the judicial decides on their legitimacy and
application in voluntary, self-administration (self-governance). But these so-called congressmen are
merely fragile men in false persona, attorneys, and businessmen that have no authority to back up
their own created law. They cannot defend themselves, being weak and feeble by their own
dwellings in legislative costume. They literally need their slaves to protect them. And thatÕs where
the US military comes in. For what is created by congress in its commercial capacity is generally
some agency or other part of the militarized Executive Branch. Only the Executive part of govern-
ment actually enforces that artfully created law of persons. A government only administers
executively (by force) the laws of the legal realm but never the Natural Law, for that Highest Law is
unenforceable and already the self-evident Law of GodÕs Realm of Actual Existence, not a patented
creation of man. No judge may alter It, and no man may ultimately escape from It. Fictional
persons (strawmen) are created so as to pretend to work around It by license from that Executive
government. It is the law of persons as legally created that the Executive government controls and
violently enforces. It sees only status (persons). The legal government has no authority over and
cannot respect that Reality of the Spiritual Realm of Nature (Heaven on Earth, as the Eternity of
Nature), but in its stead controls only its own legal creation. Government is always only the
administrator of its own debtorÕs hell, and its power extends only over the men who embrace that
hell as their abode (dwelling) and act like possessing demons of those strawmen as their projected
self-image, their Þctional personas. The military, the sheriff, marshals, and all law enforcement
ofÞcers under ßattering titles and shiny trinkets called badges are all under the Executive Branch of
federal and state government. Their badges consist of the masonic versions of the Seal of Solomon
(6-pointed star), the lesser Seal of Solomon (5 pointed star), and the pagan elven star or septagram
(7-pointed star), also known as the Sigil of Dei Ameth (Sigillum Dei Ameth), the Seal of the truth of
God, the word Ameth being Hebrew for Òtruth.”

!473
Under a state of war or emergency, which has legally existed since before any reader of this work
was born, the principal, also called the Executive ofÞcer or the president, becomes a sovereign
(lawless) god. The law is muted. Necessity overcomes any established law, as in the civil war, as the
“war” against the emergency is fought. Military authority, be it in peace or in violence, is Truly the
only form of external government (forced mind control), and the commander of the military is of
course the president as “Commander In Chief.” This permanent state of government by the
marshals of law will be fully covered in Volume II of this work. For now, make no mistake that we,
in person, legally exist in a civil citizen-ship under an Executive government and no other, a
govern-ment by force, and that the freedom (franchise) we are granted in citizen-ship is purely a
commercial venture that can be taken away at any time. A legal birth (statistical conjuration) into a
bloodless national citizenship is not the same as being Created (born) into Nature.

Our house, our abode (indwelling) as US citizenships, is only ever within the district of Columbia,
Washington DC. This is where we (our assigned person/status) are Þxed in our domicile
(permanent residence) by the event of our strawman birth, the Þctional birth of a legal id-entity. It
is not us, but the person (status) that has a dwelling. It is the man that is dwelt (deceived) into
believing (loving) that Þctional place (noun) of illusion. Its jurisdiction over the Þctional public
“land” of the States is the only place containing that legal existence. It is what distrains and
distresses us in seizure and in this human capital management platform. It is our modern day
Caesar and we frolic in its modern day municipal colosseums, appearing always in its commercial
persona. A United States personÕs house (dwelling) can only ever be located in that Þction of
Washington DC, to which all public persons as citizenships or nationals of the United States are
native (birthed). Never mistake a temporary residence in some private (foreign) State and in some
home or apartment building owned and disposable by some private land-holder as your own
actual home and domicile. Slaves only ever dwell in the home of another. What belongs to a straw-
man belongs to the sovereign government of the sovereign People by their own sovereign
privilege. Never forget that US citizenships (public persons) are only ever foreigners in any State
they reside (dwell) in.

—=—

DISTRICT:

“A division of territory. 1. Originally, THE SPACE WITHIN WHICH A

LORD COULD COERCE AND PUNISH — DISTRAIN. THE CIRCUIT
WITHIN WHICH A MAN MIGHT BE COMPELLED TO APPEAR, or
THE PLACE IN WHICH ONE HATH THE POWER OF
DISTRAINING.”
ÑWilliam C. AndersonÕs Dictionary of Law, 1889, deÞnition of ÔDistrict.Õ

—=—

It is important to note here that the deÞnition of a denizen is indeed that of being a citizen, while
the deÞnition of a citizen is not necessarily included as being a denizen. No one can possibly
consider that when slaves were “freed” by federal law in the 1860s that those “negroes” were given
the same private status as those private People in blood relation who freed them. No, they were
made common, and all common men were made into 14th amendment citizenships, as Horace
Greeley fervently exclaimed in the above quote, calling the common condition of US citizenship as
a state of serfdom. This is legalized freedom. And to be set free from slavery and indenture is
legally only enfranchisement. It’s like a permanent state of parole, where the man leaves prison but
is still in a perpetual, open-air jail wherever he may commercially travel. Also, a public citizen is
deÞned in part as a naturalized person, which is deÞned as an alien that has been denizened 




!474
(enfranchised) into the city (state/district), as opposed to a private citizen of the several (private)
States. The term citizen, it must be remembered, has multiple meanings, general (common) and
special (uncommon, by species/class).

PAROLE - adjective - Given by word of mouth; oral; NOT WRITTEN; as parol evidence… -
noun - [See parol ] Word of mouth. In military affairs, A PROMISE GIVEN BY A PRISONER
OF WAR, WHEN HE HAS LEAVE TO DEPART FROM CUSTODY, THAT HE WILL
RETURN AT THE TIME APPOINTED, UNLESS DISCHARGED. A parole is properly a
verbal or unwritten promise, but I believe it is customary to take a promise in writing.
(Webs1828)

—=—

It’s quite simple. A prisoner is set free from custody, and this is called franchise (legal freedom). But
let us not forget that this so-called “freedom” is accompanied by the burden of parole. In other
words, freedom (franchise) of every citizen-ship birthed of the nation is a state of being a “free”
prisoner under parole. But instead of parole it is called oath and allegiance. And so we must appear
in court when our vessel (person) in franchise is summoned. If you weren’t a prisoner, if you were
not free under a franchise agreement, then you would not be able to be summoned like a demon.
Sorry, but this as well is an obvious and self-evident Truth.

Parole comes from the Latin parabola, and is very similar to what a parable is. You could say that a
man on parole is a man living by his word (parable), and by the words of the state (magistrate gods)
in parabolic warning of what will happen if he doesn’t follow that legal parole statement. For to be
on parole is to be on one’s own recognizance, to Live according to one’s word spoken and agreed
upon law. It is the personiÞcation of the parable, a contractual situation based on good behavior.
Unfortunately, men without the Word of God need the word of the state (idolatrous gods) as a
court order to act in “legal” good behavior. The Bible follower, in vulgar terms, is like a man given
parole by God. He is Truly free until he breaks with that covenant (contract), ignoring the scriptural
parables, and thus begins to believe (love) and partake in Þctional persons, places, and things
(nouns). In the end, only by breaking with God’s Word (Law) does the legal word (the big lie) come
into play. While the scriptural parables save man from all Þction, the paroles (legal, artiÞcial
inducements) of man guarantees (through bond and surety) a manÕs servitude to the legal Þction of
law and its false gods through personhood. For upon the person and only upon the person is the
crime charged. The person represents the original (ancestral) sin; a sign that a man has abandoned
his One True God, Its Law, and his own blood ties to the soil. And so in effect, we are all on parole
from the state (district) as felons since legal birth, allowed to have legal freedom (franchise under
the dominion of the state) on good behavior, a “right” that can be taken away at any time. For the
ship in citizen-ship is not our own vessel. We are only surety for its good behavior, which includes
the paying of all those taxes and fees (tributes) assigned to it by its creator.

Though the reader might not yet comprehend his or her own disposition, this deÞnition is also the
deÞnition of citizenship, which is a contractual relationship that creates a promise to appear by law
in front of an executive (not judicial) administrative judge when the person of the man in surety is
so summoned. This is a performance debt, and that debt cannot be paid, only discharged. We are,
for all intents and purposes, prisoners of war given the legal franchise (political freedom) to act
civilly under the administrative civil law of Executive (military) force while participating in inter-
state commerce. Thus we are called civilians. If we should stop acting civilly, then the Marshals of
law (regulators of Arms, rank, and order) take charge, protecting the landlords from the riotous
mass of commoners until civility is forced to return therein, meaning that voluntary, free ßowing
commerce returns to an unhindered state. This is not much different from the result of a prison riot.
But in this open-air prison, we only have pat-riots, men suffering to be controlled opposition as
subjects who love the Þctional country (master) that enslaves them so as to ßy its ßag proudly in
ignorance and cognitive dissonance. (See ÒPatriotÓ deÞned in Chapter 3.)

!475
 CIVILIAN - noun - [from civil.] 1. ONE WHO IS SKILLED IN THE ROMAN LAW; A
PROFESSOR OR DOCTOR OF CIVIL LAW. 2. In a more extended sense, ONE WHO IS
VERSED IN LAW AND GOVERNMENT. 3. A student of the civil law at the university.
(Webs1828)

—=—

The common people are all civilians, though some work in non-civilian sectors. But a slave is a
slave regardless of color or descriptive title. Equal rights, you know. And though most of us are not
competent in any way with the words of the civil law and government, our voluntary consent and
conÞrmation of personhood by our actions therein cause us to be professors (lovers) of that false
law. Our signature is agreement to the whole of the law of persons, as we only sign in the surname
(property) of the stateÕs false persona.

One of the foundational maximÕs of law states that to know the law and to be able to know the law
are the same thing. And so to be clear, the principle and foundation of law is that your capacity to
know the law is considered as the same as your actual knowing of that law. Again, ignorance of
law is no excuse before any god, and now you know why. This is the very dangerous aspect of be-
ing considered to have legal capacity (personhood), for it implies an unlimited capacity for know-
ledge of the law, and voluntary ignorance is thus no exception to any rule of law. It is voluntary
ignorance when one acts in any legal capacity without knowing the law that binds those actions,
and again this is never an acceptable excuse. Once we act in persona, we are bound to the law of
that person (legal status/vessel), for we are participating in the law and thus are expected to know
it for that reason. In this authorÕs personal opinion, this is actually a good thing. For the fool de-
serves what he gets for embracing that for which he does not comprehend. To voluntarily under-
stand that which is designed to unnaturally dwell (control and limit) you is an inexcusable act. This
is as well a self-evident Truth. This is why public citizenships are slaves in bondage of surety and
why so-called ÒChristiansÓ that pledge their allegiance to the false doctrines of manÕs denominated
religions never have GodÕs negative Law protections on their side to defend against such tyrannies
of the state. I cannot tell you how many ÒChristiansÓ have not read the Bible, and of those who
have, none of them I have ever met have comprehended its intent, including the priests and
ministers of it. For to do so would necessarily force he who understands its knowledge to abandon
all Þctional things, including the supposed wealth they have accumulated. And this is why the
ßattering title of legalized, licensed ÒChristianityÓ is always false, for no follower of christ in their
actions would ever id-entify themselves as a “Christian” of the universal pagan churches of Rome.
Only legal persons need use such a defense for their guilty conscious and actions in sin (syn).

The perfect example of this maxim in its full effect is when most people sign a mortgage agreement,
doing so without reading the many-paged contract that puts them into a dead-pledge (mort-gage).
The signed contract implies under-standing of the words and all laws surrounding the contract by
the surety of that signature in legal persona. So it is with the unwritten contractual relationship
created by assuming a person of the United States and enjoying its beneÞts. With the good comes
the bad. With beneÞts come all obligations and sanctions, not the least of which is the bar on True
religious freedom to act morally on oneÕs conscious against the legal powers that be. Any one can
claim and believe in (love) the false, ßattering title of ÒChristian,Ó but no one can act accordingly.
This is the legal law, and the title is attached to the person, not directly to the man. The state
intervenes through its person (legal status), and part of a public personÕs parole is to obey the legal
law over GodÕs Word.

The status of being considered as Ònatural-bornÓ does not seem to apply to the deÞnition of
denizen as it does to a citizen. And yet a denizen is deÞned as a citizen. So which comes Þrst? Can
you be a citizen without being a denizen?

First, we must deÞne the words that make up these deÞnitions. Just what is the freedom enjoyed by
public citizens denizened into the United StateÕs district of seizure (Caesar)?

!476
 FRANCHISE - noun - fran'chiz. [See Frank.] Properly, LIBERTY, FREEDOM. Hence, 1. A
PARTICULAR PRIVILEGE OR RIGHT GRANTED BY A PRINCE OR SOVEREIGN TO
AN INDIVIDUAL OR TO A NUMBER OF PERSONS; AS THE RIGHT TO BE A BODY
CORPORATE WITH PERPETUAL SUCCESSION; the right to hold a court leet or other
court; to have waifs, wrecks, treasure-treve, or forfeitures. So the right to vote for governor,
senators and representatives, is a franchise belonging to citizens, and not enjoyed by aliens.
The right to establish a bank, is a franchise. 2. EXEMPTION FROM A BURDEN OR DUTY
TO WHICH OTHERS ARE SUBJECT. 3. THE DISTRICT OR JURISDICTION TO WHICH
A PARTICULAR PRIVILEGE EXTENDS; THE LIMITS OF AN IMMUNITY. 4. An asylum
or SANCTUARY, where PERSONS are secure from arrest. CHURCHES AND
MONASTERIES IN SPAIN ARE FRANCHISES FOR CRIMINALS. - verb transitive - TO
MAKE FREE; but enfranchise is more generally used. (Webs1828)

ENFRANCHISED - participle passive - SET FREE; released from bondage. 1. ADMITTED TO

THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES of freemen. (Webs1828)

—=—

Do not allow yourself to be confused by this legal term “freeman,” for all legal terms are terms of
deceit (art) and opposition to the Real. This is merely a legal title for a subject of some master.
Never forget that to the legal gods, the creators of patented words, the word free means franchise,
and the legal use of the word man means slave. To be free (in franchise) is not to be in direct slavery,
it is to enjoy what is allowed by that which gives the freedom (franchise). This is also called as
political independence. But this legal form of independence (without substance) is not Natural in
any way. A person (legal status) is never free in the Natural sense, only in the political sense, for its
artful existence depends on the simultaneous existence of the state that it was legally birthed
(created) in. Whatever he acting in public persona enjoys he does not actually own. His rights are
imposed upon his person, not God-given to his True Self. We cannot be fooled (dwelled) by such
concepts (fruit) of the tree of good (Reality) and evil (Þction). Whether you be a master or a subject,
your imagined power comes only from the state you voluntarily support. And make no mistake,
both of these statuses (master and servant) are only attained in sin against Jehovah. They are only
the artiÞcial titles of men.

FREEMAN - noun - [free and man.] 1. One who ENJOYS liberty, or who is not subject to the
WILL of another; ONE NOT A SLAVE OR VASSAL. 2. ONE WHO ENJOYS OR IS
ENTITLED TO A FRANCHISE OR PECULIAR PRIVILEGE; AS THE FREEMEN OF A
CITY OR STATE. (Webs1828)

ENFRANCHISE - verb transitive - s as z. [From franchise] TO SET FREE; to liberate from

slavery. 1. To make free OF A CITY, CORPORATION OR STATE; to admit to the privileges
of a freeman. The English colonies were enfranchised by special charters. 2. To free or release
from custody. 3. TO NATURALIZE; TO DENIZEN; TO RECEIVE AS DENIZENS; as, TO
ENFRANCHISE FOREIGN WORDS. (Webs1828)

TO ENFRANCHISE - TO MAKE FREE TO INCORPORATE A MAN in a society or body

politic. Vide Disfranchise. (Bouv1856)

ENFRANCHISEMENT - noun - RELEASE from slavery or custody. 1. THE ADMISSION OF

PERSONS TO THE FREEDOM OF A CORPORATION OR STATE; investiture with the
privileges of free citizens; THE INCORPORATING OF A PERSON INTO ANY SOCIETY
OR BODY POLITIC. (Webs1828)

ENFRANCHISING - ppr. - SETTING FREE from slavery or custody; ADMITTING to the

rights and privileges of denizens or free citizens in a state, or TO THE PRIVILEGES OF A
FREE MAN IN A CORPORATION. (Webs1828)

!477
 FREE - noun - [Hebrew. See Frank.] 1. Being at liberty; not being under necessity or restraint,
physical or moral; a word of general application to the body, the will or mind, and to
corporations. 2. In government, NOT ENSLAVED; not in a state of vassalage or dependence;
SUBJECT ONLY TO FIXED LAWS, MADE BY CONSENT, AND TO A REGULAR
ADMINISTRATION OF SUCH LAWS; not subject to the ARBITRARY will of a sovereign
or lord; as a free state, nation or people. 3. Instituted by a free people, OR BY CONSENT OR
CHOICE OF THOSE WHO ARE TO BE SUBJECTS, AND SECURING PRIVATE RIGHTS
AND PRIVILEGES BY FIXED LAWS AND PRINCIPLES; not arbitrary or despotic; as a free
constitution or government. There can be no free government without a democratical branch
in the constitution. 4. NOT IMPRISONED, CONFINED OR UNDER ARREST; as, the
prisoner is set free. 5. Unconstrained; unrestrained; not under compulsion or control. A man
is free to pursue his own choice; he enjoys free will. 6. PERMITTED; ALLOWED; OPEN;
NOT APPROPRIATED; as, places of honor and conÞdence are free to all; we seldom hear of a
commerce perfectly free. (Webs1828)

—=—

We are free from the arbitrary words of these gods, but not from the legislative words of them. If
the reader wishes to believe that there is a difference between these two words, then the reader will
make a perfect subject and slave to those whose word he or she follows. We are educated from
birth to choose our Word (Law) without care or question, and we are fooled into dwelling under
the words of these false idols (gods) of the nations. In short, we choose our God by the words or
Word of the Law we follow.

Clearly the slaves were caused to be “free” so that they could be incorporated (denizened) into the
United States in voluntary servitude. And in Truth, this was not much of a choice, for the only
protection they could get as black men was to accept the protective nature of the Þctional persona
(status) of United States citizen-ship under the 14th amendment, for only then would they be
considered as artiÞcially ÒequalÓ regarding civil (spiritually dead) rights. And suddenly, it was not
merely a negro being strung up and murdered in cold blood, it was a “United States citizenship.” It
was now a Þnancial crime against one of the human capital assets of the nation. And so all men,
black and white, became enfranchised (set free) under the tyranny (security and protection) of the
nation.

Even the devil is poetic in his justice, singing the prose of freedom when the Þne print suggests a
totally different verse and tune.

Perhaps the greatest wake up call for this author was the understanding of the variations of this
word free. It is perhaps one of the most deceiving words created by these pirates, for as a rat is free
in a cage so too is a citizenship free in its jurisdiction. Liberty and freedom come in two forms, that
of public or private. Perspective is again needed to comprehend just what a state of public freedom
actually is. And of course, when we add the term of art dom to any word we change the meaning
even further, so that this spell of enfranchised free-dom can be fully known to he who suffers its
legal delusion. Like the snake eating its own tail (i.e., speaking itself into existence), no matter which
word a slave uses, his freedom is a circular illusion. He is a dweller in Þction. Freedom in America
is merely a license to conduct commerce in the franchise of a citizen-ship, with the agreement to be
put in jail and become prison labor for breaking that chaotic mix of rules and regulations guiding
one’s contractual good behavior with regard to that legally permissive, civil franchise.

DOM - Used as a termination, denotes JURISDICTION, OR PROPERTY AND

JURISDICTION; primarily, DOOM, JUDGMENT; as in kingdom, earldom. Hence it is used
to denote STATE, CONDITION OR QUALITY, as in wisdom, freedom. (Webs1828)

FREEDOM - noun - 1. A state of EXEMPTION from the power or control of another; liberty;
EXEMPTION FROM SLAVERY, SERVITUDE OR CONFINEMENT. Freedom is
PERSONAL, CIVIL, POLITICAL, AND RELIGIOUS. [See Liberty.] 2. Particular privileges;

!478
FRANCHISE; immunity; as the freedom of a city. 3. POWER OF ENJOYING FRANCHISES.
4. EXEMPTION FROM FATE, NECESSITY, OR ANY CONSTRAINT IN CONSEQUENCE
OF PREDETERMINATION OR OTHERWISE; as the freedom of the will. 5. Any exemption
from constraint or control. 6. Ease or facility of doing any thing. He speaks or acts with
freedom. 7. Frankness; boldness. He addressed his audience with freedom. 8. LICENSE;
improper familiarity; violation of the rules of decorum; with a plural. Beware of what are
called innocent freedoms. (Webs1828)

FREEDOM - Liberty; THE RIGHT TO DO WHAT IS NOT FORBIDDEN BY LAW.

FREEDOM DOES NOT PRECLUDE THE IDEA OF SUBJECTION TO LAW; INDEED, IT
PRESUPPOSES THE EXISTENCE OF SOME LEGISLATIVE PROVISION, THE
OBSERVANCE OF WHICH INSURES FREEDOM TO US, by securing the like observance
from others. (Bouv1856)

FREEDOM - 1. (Natural freedom) The QUALITY or STATE of being free, as:



(a) the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action
(b) liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another: independence
(c) the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous
(freedom from care)
(h) unrestricted use <gave him the freedom of their home>

FREEDOM - 2. (as Political Freedom) 



(a) A POLITICAL RIGHT
(b) FRANCHISE, PRIVILEGE

(Webster’s online, sourced from - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freedom)

LIBERTY - noun - [L. libertas, from liber, free.] 1. Freedom from restraint, in a general sense,
and applicable to the body, or to the will or mind. The body is at liberty, when not conÞned;
the will or mind is at liberty, when not checked or controlled. A man enjoys liberty, when no
physical force operates to restrain his actions or volitions.

2. NATURAL LIBERTY consists in the power of acting as one thinks Þt, without any
restraint or control, EXCEPT FROM THE LAWS OF NATURE. It is a state of
EXEMPTION FROM THE CONTROL OF OTHERS, AND FROM POSITIVE LAWS
AND THE INSTITUTIONS OF SOCIAL LIFE. THIS LIBERTY IS ABRIDGED BY THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF GOVERNMENT.

3. CIVIL LIBERTY is the liberty of men in a state of society, or natural liberty, so far
only abridged and restrained, as is necessary and expedient for the safety and interest
of the society, state or nation. A RESTRAINT OF NATURAL LIBERTY, NOT
NECESSARY OR EXPEDIENT FOR THE PUBLIC, IS TYRANNY OR OPPRESSION.
Civil liberty is an exemption from the arbitrary will of others, which exemption is
secured by established laws, which restrain every man from injuring or controlling
another. HENCE THE RESTRAINTS OF LAW ARE ESSENTIAL TO CIVIL LIBERTY.
The liberty of one depends not so much on the removal of all restraint from him, as on
the DUE RESTRAINT UPON THE LIBERTY OF OTHERS. In this sentence, the latter
word liberty denotes natural liberty.

4. POLITICAL LIBERTY is sometimes used as synonymous with civil liberty. But it

more properly designates the liberty of a nation, the freedom of a nation or state from
all unjust abridgment of its rights and independence BY ANOTHER NATION. Hence
we often speak of the political liberties of Europe, or the nations of Europe.

!479
 5. RELIGIOUS LIBERTY is the free right of adopting and enjoying opinions on
religious subjects, AND OF WORSHIPING THE SUPREME BEING ACCORDING TO
THE DICTATES OF CONSCIENCE, WITHOUT EXTERNAL CONTROL. (Webs1828)

LIBERTY (Cont.) - 6. Liberty, in metaphysics, AS OPPOSED TO NECESSITY, is the power of

an AGENT to do or forbear any particular action, according to the determination or thought
of the mind, by which either is preferred to the other. Freedom of the will; exemption from
compulsion or restraint in willing or volition. 7. Privilege; exemption; IMMUNITY ENJOYED
BY PRESCRIPTION OR BY GRANT; with a plural. Thus we speak of the liberties of the
commercial cities of Europe. 8. Leave; PERMISSION GRANTED. The witness obtained
liberty to leave the court. 9. A SPACE IN WHICH ONE IS PERMITTED TO PASS
WITHOUT RESTRAINT, AND BEYOND WHICH HE MAY NOT LAWFULLY PASS; with a
plural; AS THE LIBERTIES OF A PRISON. 10. Freedom of action or speech beyond the
ordinary bounds of civility or decorum. Females should repel all improper liberties. To take
the liberty to do or say any thing, to use freedom not specially granted. To set at liberty, TO
DELIVER FROM CONFINEMENT; to release from restraint. To be at liberty, to be free from
restraint. Liberty of the press, is freedom from any restriction on the power to publish books;
the free power of publishing what one pleases, subject only to punishment for abusing the
privilege, or publishing what is mischievous to the public or injurious to individuals.
(Webs1828)

FREEMAN - One who is in the enjoyment of the right to do whatever he pleases, NOT
FORBIDDEN BY LAW. ONE IN THE POSSESSION OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ENJOYED
BY, the people GENERALLY. (Bouv1856)

FREEMAN - noun - [free and man.] 1. One who ENJOYS liberty, or who is not subject to the
will of another; one not a slave or vassal. 2. ONE WHO ENJOYS OR IS ENTITLED TO A
FRANCHISE or peculiar privilege; as the freemen OF A CITY OR STATE. (Webs1828)

—=—

Of means belonging to. So a freeman of a city or state is a person belonging to a city or state. And this
is why the private People are not titled (styled) as the common people of the United States. The
creator is never born of its own creation, never beholden of it.

I remember reading that statement for the Þrst time, where freedom is deÞned as an exemption from
fate and from consequence of our actions. It was then that I realized how dangerous this word really
is, and how foolish we have been to allow our so-called leaders in their Þctionally declared
sovereignty to possess such freedom so utterly and without moral, religious law or test. We have
actually been fooled into believing that the separation of religion from legality in law is a good
thing by those who have used such a separation to utterly defeat and morally deprive us. For the
artiÞcially induced ÒfreedomÓ allowed in legal settings is speciÞcally designed to bypass personal
responsibility and to place it artiÞcially on some Þction of law, some person or ßattering title, thus
freeing the man from correcting or being punished by his own sins. This is the way of the church
and state, one protecting the other in an unending corruption of fate. The state exempts the church
and the church exempts the state, for both are false gods of their own legal creation.

These painful Realities about our Þctional delusions are disturbing to say the least. The author
shares no pleasure in revealing the True Nature of our collective disposition, nor do I envy the
reader that has made it this far only to discover his own voluntary enslavement in franchise, his
illusion of freedom surely and hopefully crushed. For with hope comes hesitation and inaction. As
stated above, citizenship destroys Natural Freedom and True Religious Freedom is outlawed while one
is acting in a public person-hood. Freedom of religion in legal terms is not a Natural freedom but a
civil, political one, and means only that belief (as a noun) is free, not action based on love (verb).
But most importantly, knowledge destroys hope, and hope is the key to inaction and accepted
subjugation. Whether we believe we will be saved by the church Messiah or by the constitution,

!480
this hope must be destroyed so that we may manifest our hopes through knowledge of our own
power and weakness. A man caught up in the franchise of personhood cannot act on his own
moral, religious beliefs, for his law is the strict law of nations and their gods, the law of Þctional
persons, and thus the law of commercial franchise (legal freedom in a national debtor’s prison
called as hell). When we add this word dom to the word free to make freedom we simply Þnd this to
mean a franchise that is in the dominion or domicile (jurisdiction) of another. We must always
remember to distinguish between the negative (unalienable/Natural) rights of the man and the
positive law rights of the person he is bound in surety to. Negative is unenforced and a choice,
positive is enforced with no choice. There is nothing of Nature that is positive (in need of proof) or
that is granted by license or permit by man, and political or civil “freedom” and “liberty” are no
exceptions. Never forget what freedom Truly is, but always be conscious that false, legal
(adversarial/satanic) freedom is all that any citizenship ever has or may have, as that which is
adversarial to Natural Freedom under God’s Law. All prisoners have some semblance of freedom.

—=—

"They rattle their chains to boast of their freedom."

—Dresden James

—=—

Returning to these conceptual genealogical trees of rotten fruit, let us compare the absolute fable
(outright embellished lie) of the projected his-story of those so-called “Founding Fathers,” those
creator gods of the United States, with the parables in the sincere allegory (non-history) of Jesus
christ. Or we may compare this “fabled genealogy” as the same bloodline of kings in Europe and in
Asia through this same methodology. This concept of being a king, pope, Caesar, Kaiser, ruler, god,
magistrate, prince, governor, archon, or any other false, legal term used to describe the supposed
“right” of men in such god-like positions over other men is all based on the mashel, the proverbial
parable, the story told to both the generations of the dead heroes of the past and to their slaves,
citizens, and subjects acquired by birthright or lack thereof. If we stop to consider for a moment, we
realize that every religion and every nation has its parabolic “creation” story, many quite similar to
the Bible, and most if not all the mere simulation of lawyers and opportunists pretended to be great
men and even gods (fathers) of the parabolic dominions of nations and countries we still today
celebrate as our Þctional reality of ßag and country (legal origin). The names (words) are changed
but the story is generally in similitude. We believe in (love) the fables we learn in public school
describing these private men as our “fathers,” whose posterity (genealogical issue of bloodline
descendants) manage us and control (govern) our minds through their created, ordained,
established, and constantly evolving govern-ment of force.

But it is always the Bible that is spit upon and cast out as being a false history by those who refuse
to even read it and do due diligence upon its many parabolic teachings. It is perhaps the only Book
of books that is demonized for being at least part Þction despite all those other sources of history
and teaching being known wholeheartedly as Þctions. Plato is no more disrespected for his use of
allegory and personiÞcation of his parabolic teachings than is Sir Author Conan Doyle or J. R. R.
Tolkien. But the Bible must be culturally invalidated at all costs for this crime of metaphor! Does
this really make sense to you, that Dr. Seuss is a more respected storyteller to most common chattel
than the authors and True Author of the Holy Bible, or can you begin to see that this demonization
is just part of governing the minds of men away from that which would free them?

Upon these fabled genealogical bloodlines and the respect demanded of them to have esoteric
authority as “other gods” before Jehovah, the Bible stands clearly in warning against this well-
ingrained ritualistic worship of recorded genes.

!481
 —=—

“…that thou mightest charge some that THEY TEACH NO OTHER

DOCTRINE (LAW), NEITHER GIVE HEED TO FABLES AND
ENDLESS GENEALOGIES, which minister questions, rather than
godly edifying which is in faith: so do. Now the end of the
commandment is CHARITY OUT OF A PURE HEART, AND OF A
GOOD CONSCIENCE, AND OF FAITH (TRUTH) UNFEIGNED: From
which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
DESIRING TO BE TEACHERS OF THE LAW; UNDERSTANDING
NEITHER WHAT THEY SAY, NOR WHEREOF THEY AFFIRM.”
—1 Timothy 1: 3-7, KJB

—=—

To our friends in the United Kingdom I am sorry, but there is no way to overlook this passage.
There is no way that you can justify your king or queen nor the corporations and landholdings
held under its crown. But at least your bubble is easily bursted as such. In America, we even
acknowledge our strange existence as a dream. The American dream.

—=—

“It’s called the American Dream 


because you have to be asleep to believe it.”

“You are given the illusion of choice. Americans are meant to feel free
by the exercise of meaningless choices.”

“Elections and politicians are in place in order to give Americans the

illusion that they have freedom of choice. You don’t really have choice
in this country.”

“War is rich old men protecting their property by sending middle class
and lower class young men off to die. It always has been. It’s all about
owning things.”
—George Carlin (separate quotes)

—=—

“I’m fascinated that our government can lie to us so blatantly, so

obviously, for so long, and we do absolutely nothing about it.”

“You are free to do as we tell you!”

—Bill Hicks (separate quotes)

—=—

!482
Faith, as stated above in the Þrst book of Timothy, is a state of mind without questions. This is not a
commandment that we should not question the authority and doctrines of church and state, as
those bodies have pretended and taught against scripture in their ridiculously proclaimed in-
fallibility. This is however a statement of personal wisdom, for we may only have Faith (Trust/
Truth) in that which is self-evident and in self-Existence. No words or doctrines of man qualify as
such. Therefore the only Law is the Word of God, which is the unwritten Law, that which is so
obvious even when challenged by the great brainwashed living Þctions that it cannot be reasonably
questioned. We need not ask what is right or wrong, only what is self-evident Truth. To a habitual
liar, to a person, the Truth is feared and therefore is perceived and acted against as evil. For within is
the self-Existent answer to all questions and the defeat of all lies, unless of course those questions
are posed towards things not Real and not of Nature. Thus we cannot consider Truth as good or
evil, as the fruit of the tree of conceptual knowledge, for good and evil exist only as the re-creations
of men. They are only words. They are relative concepts, not self-Existing. They must be applied by
the mind of man to whatever that man wishes to justify or demonize for his own purpose or lame
excuse.

To see only the Truth of all things Ñ this is the essence of a spiritual awakening in man, for this
Highest of all Law must be felt, not merely comprehended. It must be Lived, not just believed in
(loved). It must be fully applied to all things, not merely written down and conveniently forgotten
or licensed to be ignored. And as with all systems of law, there simply is no excuse to break It be-
fore Its Creator. Spirituality is intricately connected with Nature, not outside of its Realm or Laws.
To face Reality and embrace It for exactly what It Is stands as the very cornerstone of spiritual
thought. It is not super- (above) natural. It is not meta (across, after) physical. It isnÕt the temporary
result of ingesting drugs or of smoking a weed. It is the Highest of conscious Being and total
awareness. It is empathy towards all things, Living or mineral, and their True place and purpose in
Nature.

Once we have this perspective, this policy of Truth, we may Þnally understand why this is called as
the ÒOne True Religion.Ó When one worships only the Truth of all things, only then is one in touch
with his Creator, with his very own Nature, and only then can he be Truly Free Ñ the freedom from
lies and artiÞce. The word God (as Jehovah) is the word Truth. One True Religion is the same as the
One Religion of Truth. There can be only One, simply and reasonably because there is only One,
self-Existent Truth in all things. Together, as a Whole, all parts and each man equal the Oneness that
Is Jehovah. Amazingly, self-evidently, we are all members of this church (People) whether we like it
or not. We cannot legitimately deny our place in Nature. We can only lie and pre-tend the non-
Existence of Existence (God), which is Truly an act of self-defeat, of nihilistic suicide.

Ñ=Ñ

“Peace if possible, TRUTH AT ALL COSTS!”

—Martin Luther

Ñ=Ñ

And so it is that we are battling against the organized, ecclesiastical and secular enemies of the One
True Religion, for we are helpless and can only be co-dependent upon the church and state without
GodÕs Word as Its conscious Existence in every man. We have no Real choice in this regard, for
when we Live by only Truth at all costs then our choice must always be to protect what is that
Existing and Living Truth, the verb that is God. We are battling all other religions and mythologies
(nouns) purely of manÕs design, which by default may only be un-True considering their secondary
and therefore non-self-evident source and false-doctrinal truth. We battle the numerous images,
cult-ures, scripts (words), agents, and of course their idols, each an exclusive, sometimes warring
part of the whole of what is the anarchical, anti-One religions of the world.

!483
The combinations (corporations) and denominations (names) of church and state will doctrinally
disagree on these points, I’m certain, seeking always to externalize Jehovah (the God [One] of self-
Existence) from the eternal Creation (cycle of Life and Energy). But nowhere in the Bible is this
intent of false doctrines made known, that the Law (Word) of God can possibly be anything else or
external from the very Law of Nature. This doctrinal belief is at best a logical fallacy, and at worst
an excuse used for self-imposed license to break with God’s Word (Law) of Nature, to create a
separate law and realm opposed to God and Nature. To separate the Creator from Creation is like
pretending an author doesn’t Exist, that the author is not a part of his own Creation. Thus, it is to
pretend that Jehovah (verb), as all that Is, Was, and Shall be, is actually not the same thing as
Reality, as Nature. This is an insane process of thought, completely without any spiritual bounds.

Here again the intent of this work in revealing the language of law and the Existing (Living) Law is
hopefully distinguishable, for to teach the Truth (Law) by words alone is to teach Þction, and yet to
be ignorant of the Þction of law is to fall and live under that law, not in Faith (Truth). To believe in
God (Jehovah) is to believe in what needs no belief to Exist. To not believe in self-Existence is, quite
frankly, moronic. In Charity and with the purest of intentions toward this end only is this work
given freely. I desire not to teach the law as that which should be worshiped, but to cause the
utmost of contempt for these false afÞrmations upon manÕs artiÞcial designs that we call so
mistakenly and patriotically as the legal law of the land (due process of law). For there is no Real
land in legal terms, only the Þctional titles of the artiÞcial real estate thereof. The landholders can
only hold God’s Creation (Land) as property if all of us are fooled into believing that legal “land” is
the same as Real Land. And so they hold the territory (terra) while we hold a paper that is a
national representation thereof. As long as we are made to dwell in Þction, they may keep us from
our God (our own place in Nature).

Let us consider Þnally the difference between the intent of the authors of histories, again using the
fabled “Founding Father” lie versus the allegorical story of christ. We know the intent of the Bible,
of the christ character and his teachings, for they are unmistakable to the reasonable man, which is
to teach man to govern his own mind in the pursuit of Pure Liberty in self-evident Love, Charity
and Peace. Only those who’ve not read the Bible with reasonable discernment, deciphering that
which is misnomered or lost in translation; as those who listen only to the priest-class or the anti-
priest class, and those reading in dog-Latin without being mindful of these mis-transliterations of
original language as displayed in so many sources, would suggest that the Bible has some altered
motive. Only the men and corporations abusing the scriptural word to their own artful and
monetary ends could possibly miss or purposefully ignore the revealed Truth therein. This is
obvious by simply reading the book without the opinions of the many protagonists that seek to
ruin it in the minds of those whom they seek to keep under their own legal law or to purchase their
products. And yet, as far as US history goes, it is quite obvious that the United States was set up as
nothing more than the commercial hub of the West, while totally under the control (government) of
the Crown and King of England. It was pro-slavery, pro-usury, and of course pro-king (vicar). It is
now common knowledge that George Washington and his fellow gods (fathers) were of course the
bloodline of those same kings of Europe, all traceable to the genealogy of King John, and would
never have been in the positions they had already attained over the colonies (grants of the Crown)
if they were not of the fabled “noble” blood of those aristocratic royal families. This is a self-evident
fact easily veriÞable by genealogy records and by the colonial and British laws and quotes of the
time.

The point here is that these gods were the creators of a government intended only for the beneÞt of
themselves, their own posterity (bloodline, future “legitimate” heirs), and for no one else. This was
the intent, and one’s intention while in possession of any thing whatsoever is said to be nine-
tenth’s of the law. The word “father” is merely another word for “god,” and Washington was of
course made king (president) of the commercial nation, the magistrate god extraordinaire, as the
most celebrated freemason in America.

Even in its etymology the word Washington, as the capital of the United States, comes from
“President George Washington (1732-1799); THE FAMILY NAME IS FROM A TOWN IN

!484
NORTHEASTERN ENGLAND, from Old English, literally "ESTATE (HOUSE) OF A MAN
NAMED WASSA." The US state was named when it was FORMED AS A TERRITORY in 1853
(admitted to the union 1889).”

This notion of a person (status) being birthed under the district and house (Arms) of “Washington”
as the son of a nation (father) is in stark contrast to a man being born in Nature privately under
God. In the verse below, the word “power” translates in Strong’s G1849 (exousia) to power of
choice, as the liberty of doing as one pleases, both physical and mental power, and even to the
power of kings and magistrates and rule of government. And so the True Power of free will is
said to come only from those born in Nature and reborn as the regenerate sons of God, unspotted
and unblemished by the legal powers that be and by fabled genealogies and birth certiÞcations,
and never the surrogate legal sons of a nation (artiÞcial family). And this, ultimately, is the theme of
this entire work; that one can only be Truly Free in Nature by abandoning all Þction and becoming
exactly what we were originally born to be, the eternal and free sons of God. But just as that false
legal freedom of enfranchisement, which is granted to the denizens in citizen-ship to the nations,
can only be enjoyed by strict legal (anti-God) law and license, True Natural Freedom under God
can only be enjoyed by obeying that self-evident negative duty under God’s Law to all men. Thus,
to each man alone, be it citizenship to the legal gods or be it submission to the Natural Duty under
Jehovah, some “God” always Exists and has authority, and only our choices manifest which God
we serve and are protected by; the god of persons or the God of our very Own Nature. Our Self is
either ruled by our own minds and actions or by the mind control (govern-ment) of other men that
control our actions through personhood. To receive God is to consent to and fear God’s Law, the
Word, and nothing more. And the Word is Jesus christ, whom we are to follow in Life, not in the
spiritual death and vain prayer (pleading) of citizenship.

—=—

“But as many as received him, TO THEM GAVE HE POWER TO

BECOME THE SONS OF GOD, even to them that believe on his name:
WHICH WERE BORN, NOT OF BLOOD, NOR OF THE WILL OF THE
FLESH, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN, BUT OF GOD.”
—John 1: 12-13, KJB

—=—

Let us here ensure an understanding between the several forms of governments we may suffer
before moving on, speciÞcally noting the difference between these outlets of either public or private
law. Remember, that which we call as father is god, and the “founding fathers” of any and every
nation will be the gods over all persons of that nation, depending upon each man’s member status
(public/domestic or private/foreign) towards that nation. Those who operate in the commercial
personhood of another are always the subjects of that public god while conducting themselves in
said performance debt of citizenship, a relationship assumed to be present 100% of the time while
in residence, and so also to the current posterity of those founding gods. We (our persons) dwell
(have domicile) in the house (district/jurisdiction) of the god of our strawman, which is the creator
and administrator of its own legal persons. Our public status can only exist by accepting our
subjective place in that house and under its gods (magistrates). Otherwise we are labeled as illegal
and alien, and upon capture are publicly (internationally) de-ported to where the gods of our ship
lie, where our registered nativity story happened. And so we can see the difference between just a
sampling of the many forms of law that effect the agentic, public persons of a nation and how
private men (those without public, personiÞed, and registered exterior ÒselfÓ) are immune.

Strangely enough, the word family stems from the word and concept of familiarity. To be familiar to
a nation and its gods, one must be registered and act within a public persona, in a name, number,
and other signs and marks that are familiar to the state. This should not be surprising to the reader

!485
by this point, for we are speaking of legalese, of Þgurativeness, and nothing legal has an actual
family because no blood Exists in Þctional persons. ItÕs all about perspective. And we must learn to
recognize the perspective of those who seek to be father to all men, from the dictator to the pope to
kings, presidents, and prime ministers. Men playing as false gods will always have the same
agenda and can only rule by force or consent. Thus they establish the familiar relation-ship of
person-hood to invoke volunteerism (the doctrine of master and servant) so that the servants come
to love their own enslavement and the force behind it. Pat-riot-ism. Controlled opposition. And the
best example of this false family story is the historical fallacy perpetrated as the story of our so-
called Òfounding fathers,Ó whom we certainly cannot deny are portrayed as some sort of gods. And
their posterity (bloodline) are still the fathers (gods) of our strawmen and thus our imaginations.

FAMILIAR - adjective - familÕyar. [Latin familiaris, familia, family, which see.] 1. Pertaining to a
family; domesticÉ 7. COMMON; frequent and intimate. By familiar intercourse, strong
attachments are soon formedÉ - noun - 1. An intimate; a close companion; one long
acquainted; ONE ACCUSTOMED TO ANOTHER BY FREE, unreserved converse. 2. A
DEMON OR EVIL SPIRIT SUPPOSED TO ATTEND AT A CALL. But in general we say, a
familiar spirit. (Webs1828)

FAMILY - noun - [Latin familia.] 1. THE COLLECTIVE BODY OF PERSONS WHO LIVE IN
ONE HOUSE AND UNDER ONE HEAD OR MANAGER; a household, including parents,
children AND SERVANTS, and as the case may be, LODGERS OR BOARDERS. 2. Those
who descend from one common progenitor; a tribe or race; kindred; lineage. Thus the
Israelites were a branch of the family of Abraham; and the descendants of Reuben, of
Manasseh, etc., were called their families. The whole human race are the family of Adam,
the human family. 3. Course of descent; genealogy; line of ancestors. Go and complain thy
family is young. 4. HONORABLE DESCENT; NOBLE OR RESPECTABLE STOCK. He is a
man of family. 5. A COLLECTION OR UNION OF NATIONS OR STATES. THE STATES OF
EUROPE WERE, BY THE PREVAILING MAXIMS OF ITS POLICY, CLOSELY UNITED IN
ONE FAMILY. 6. In popular language, an order, class or genus of animals or of other natural
productions, having something IN COMMON, BY WHICH THEY ARE DISTINGUISHED
FROM OTHERS; as, quadrupeds constitute a family of animals, and we speak of the family or
families of plants. (Webs1828)

FAMILY - Originally, SERVANTS; in its modern comprehensive meaning, a collective body

of persons living together in one house, or within the curtilage. In popular acceptance
includes parents, children, servants — ALL WHOSE DOMICILE OR HOME is ordinarily in
THE SAME HOUSE AND UNDER THE SAME MANAGEMENT AND HEAD. In its limited
sense signiÞes father, mother, and children; in its ordinary acceptation, all the relatives who
descend FROM A COMMON ROOT; in its most extensive scope, ALL THE INDIVIDUALS
WHO LIVE TOGETHER UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF ANOTHER, including even
SERVANTS. The most comprehensive deÞnition is, a number of persons who live in one
house and under one management or head. No speciÞc number of persons is required; NOR
THAT THEY EAT WHERE THEY LIVE, NOR THAT THEY BE EMPLOYED IN OR ABOUT
THE HOUSE. Children, wife and children, blood relatives, or the members of the domestic
circle; ACCORDING TO THE CONNECTION. Includes children over age, if they have no
home elsewhere. (WCA1889)

HEAD OF A FAMILY - The PERSON who controls, supervises or manages the affairs about
a HOUSE. Where there is a husband or father, he is ordinarily the head; but there may be a
head where there is no marriage relation. (WCA1889)

FEDERAL - 1. Pertaining to A LEAGUE OR COMPACT BETWEEN INDEPENDENT

SOVEREIGNTIES. 3. Composed of STATES which retain only a portion of their original
sovereignty relating to the constitution, treaties, or laws, or the power or government of the
organization thereby formed. Appropriate to our GENERAL Government, the government
of the United States, considered as A UNION OF STATES OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

!486
THE WORD "NATIONAL" RECOGNIZES THE STATE GOVERNMENTS AND THE
GOVERNMENT OF THE UNION AS DISTINCT SYSTEMS. In the second sense are the
common expressions Federal or federal— amendments. Constitution, courts, elections,
decisions, judges, laws and statutes, question, government, ofÞcer. In these phrases the word
of contrast is "State:" as, State constitutions, courts, laws, etc. See those titles. (WCA1889)

NATIONAL - Pertaining or relating to A NATION AS A WHOLE; commonly applied in

American law to institutions, laws, or affairs of the United States or its government, AS
OPPOSED TO THOSE OF THE SEVERAL STATES. The term “national” as used in the
phrase “national of the United States” is broader than the term “citizen.” (Black4)

LAW OF THE STATES - The general system of law regulating the relative rights and duties of
PERSONS within the JURISDICTION of a State, OPERATING UPON THEM EVEN
WHEN ENGAGED IN INTER-STATE COMMERCE, and subject to be modiÞed by State
legislation, whether consisting in that customary law which prevails as the common law of
the land in each State, OR as a CODE of POSITIVE provisions expressly enacted, is
nevertheless the law of the State in which it is ADMINISTERED, and derives its force and
effect from the actual or presumed exercise of its legislative power. THIS LAW DOES NOT
EMANATE FROM THE AUTHORITY OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT, NOR FLOW
FROM THE EXERCISE OF ANY LEGISLATIVE POWERS CONFERRED UPON
CONGRESS, nor can it be implied as existing by force of any other legislative authority
than that of the several (private) States in which it is enforced. It has never been doubted that
this entire body and system of law, regulating in general the relative rights and duties of
persons within the territorial jurisdiction of the State, without regard to their pursuits, is
subject to change at the will of the legislature of each State, except as that will may be
restrained by the Constitution of the United States. It is to this law that PERSONS WITHIN
THE SCOPE OF ITS OPERATION LOOK FOR THE DEFINITION OF THEIR RIGHTS and
for the redress of wrongs. IT IS THE SOURCE OF ALL THOSE RELATIVE OBLIGATIONS
AND DUTIES ENFORCEABLE BY LAW, the observance of which the State undertakes to
enforce as its PUBLIC POLICY. AND IT WAS IN CONTEMPLATION OF THE
CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF THIS SEPARATE SYSTEM OF LAW IN EACH STATE
THAT THE CONSTITUTION WAS FRAMED AND ORDAINED with such legislative
powers as are therein granted expressly or by reasonable implication. (WCA1889)

LAW OF THE LAND - (1) The general PUBLIC LAW of a State, binding upon all the
MEMBERS of the community under all circumstances, AND NOT PARTIAL OR PRIVATE
LAWS, AFFECTING THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS OR CLASSES OF
INDIVIDUALS. Also, DUE PROCESS OF LAW. See Process, 1, Due, etc. (2) “This
Constitution, AND THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES which shall be made in
pursuance thereof; AND ALL TREATIES MADE, or which shall be made, under the
Authority of the United States, SHALL BE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE
LAND.” (WCA1889)

PUBLIC LAW - (1) INTERNATIONAL LAW. (2) A law involving PUBLIC interests.
OPPOSED, PRIVATE LAW: A LAW FOR THE BENEFIT OF AN INDIVIDUAL OR
INDIVIDUALS. In one sense "public" law designates INTERNATIONAL LAW, AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM THE LAWS OF A PARTICULAR NATION OR STATE; and in
another sense, a law or statute that applies to the PEOPLE GENERALLY OF THE NATION
OR STATE ADOPTING OR ENACTING IT, AS OPPOSED TO A “PRIVATE” LAW which
affects an individual or a small number of persons. LEGISLATIVE ACTS CONCERNING
PUBLIC INTERESTS ARE NECESSARILY "PUBLIC" LAWS. These may be abolished at the
will of the legislature... The Dartmouth College Case has no application where a statute is a
public law relating to a public subject within the dominion of the general legislative power of
the State, and involving the public rights and public welfare of the entire community.
(WCA1889)

!487
 CIVIL LAW - THE LAW OF CITIZENS: the law which THE PEOPLE OF A STATE ORDAIN
FOR THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT. (1) By “the civil law,” absolutely taken, IS
UNDERSTOOD THE CIVIL OR MUNICIPAL LAW OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, as
comprised in the institute, code, and digest of the emperor Justinian, and the novel
constitutions of himself and predecessors. Whatever strength these IMPERIAL LAWS may
have obtained in Great Britain is DUE TO IMMEMORIAL USAGE IN PARTICULAR
CASES AND IN PARTICULAR COURTS, or to introduction by express consent of
Parliament.' See Pandects. (2) The laws which a community or state has established for the
regulation OF ITS OWN AFFAIRS, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE LAW OF
NATIONS ; also, that portion of such laws which REGULATES DEALINGS BETWEEN
SUBJECTS OR CITIZENS, in distinction from criminal law, military law, maritime law, and
the general law-merchant. Compare Municipal Law. (WCA1889)

LAW OF NATIONS, OR INTERNATIONAL LAW - The law which regulates the conduct
and MUTUAL INTERCOURSE of independent states with each other BY REASON AND
NATURAL JUSTICE. (WCA1889)

LAW OF THE FLAG - The law of the NATION to which A VESSEL (i.e., SHIP) BELONGS.
(WCA1889)

—=—

Now let us pause here so that we may clearly differentiate the above forms of law, which have
authority only over artiÞcial persons, places and things (nouns/names/titles/styles). They are laws
(doctrines) created and written by men, enforced by men, and owned as property by men. And
since ownership of anything within the legal realm is exclusively built of those legal words/terms
of art of that legal realm and constructed upon nothing of Nature or that which is Real (self-
Existent), no reason is needed in our understanding and duty to that law. We only need volunteer
and submit to these false gods and their inventions.

Comparatively, when speaking of the unwritten law that stands alone as an invention and/or
property of no man, as the self-evident Law of Nature’s God and Creator, we may then
comprehend the words of poets and patriots that were willing to actually die for their beliefs, for
their way of Life that was determinant not on religion (noun), but on religiously following the Law
of True, spiritual reason.

—=—

“THE STATE OF NATURE HAS A LAW OF NATURE TO GOVERN IT,

WHICH OBLIGES EVERY ONE: AND REASON, WHICH IS THAT
LAW, TEACHES ALL MANKIND, WHO WILL BUT CONSULT IT,
THAT BEING ALL EQUAL AND INDEPENDENT, NO ONE OUGHT
TO HARM ANOTHER IN HIS LIFE, HEALTH, LIBERTY, OR
POSSESSIONS… (and) when his own preservation comes not in
competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of
mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take
away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the
liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.”
—John Locke, from ‘The Two Treatises of Civil Government’ (Hollis ed.)

—=—

!488
And so we may read the following with the knowledge that this notion of a Law unwritten comes
not from other men, but undeniably from inside each of us. But we must also remember that what
seems reasonable in Nature (under God) may be made to seem unreasonable in the legal, civil, and
ecclesiastical realm of Þctions. Money, that great painter and artiÞcer of all things, or more to the
point its valuation (mammon), may for instance convince a reasonable man that competition is
necessary to preserve that system of money in mammon, or what he ambiguously calls as Òthe
economy.Ó Of course, the economy may only serve to harm some while beneÞting the few, to make
kings of the few and employ (use for labor) the rest. And so what is completely unreasonable, like
competition under that system and law of the gods of mammon, seems like a perfectly reasonable
replacement of the pure Charity steeped in brotherly Love we are directed to in the scripture
(Natural Law), where money and its value does not and Truly cannot Exist. My point is merely to
say that reason is unfortunately a relative state of mind towards whatever disposition one Þnds
himself under. And once Þction, artiÞce, and respectively the laws over those things of nothingness
are applied and Þnd their way into the reason center of the brain, the trinity is broken and the man
is made spiritually dead towards his own Nature and Reality. One simply cannot be Truly
reasonable while one respects as Real that which is self-evidently not Real.

Now we may see how the legal dictionaries (courts) give their opinion and legal perspective on just
what the Natural Law Is and how it compares to the law of false gods. I stress again here that this is
the highest evidence in law that the legal state recognizes a power, an authority, and a Law-maker
(Creator) Higher than itself. This is not a religion, it is the Law. Only a fool would dismiss this as
mere religious gobbledygook, instead of embracing wholeheartedly and REASONABLY the one
thing that the state admits as Higher than its own legal existence and law. But then, these gods of
the nations like nothing better than to suffer fools…

NATURAL LAW, OR LAW OF NATURE - The rule of human action PRESCRIBED BY THE
CREATOR, and DISCOVERABLE BY THE LIGHT OF REASON. (WCA1889)

DIVINE OR REVEALED LAW - THE LAW OF NATURE, IMPARTED BY GOD HIMSELF.

(WCA1889)

NATURAL LIBERTY - The power of acting as one thinks Þt, without any restraint or control,
UNLESS BY THE LAW OF NATURE. (Black1)

NATURAL LIFE - The period between birth and natural death, as distinguished from civil
death… (Black1)

NATURAL INFANCY - A period of non-responsible life, which ends with the seventh year.
(Black1)

NATURAL RIGHTS - Those rights which are PLAINLY ASSURED BY NATURAL LAW;
such as the right to life, to personal liberty, etc. (Black1)

EXISTING RIGHT - Rights as EXIST UNDER GENERAL LAWS. (Black4)

NATURAL OBLIGATION - One which LACKS LEGAL SANCTION (LEGAL

PUNISHMENT), and therefore cannot be enforced in a court of justice, but which imposes A
MORAL DUTY upon the person bound. (Black1)

NATURAL LAW - The rule and dictate of RIGHT REASON, SHOWING THE MORAL
DEFORMITY OR MORAL NECESSITY THERE IS IN ANY ACT, according to its
suitableness or unsuitableness to a reasonable nature. This expression, "natural law," or jus
naturale, was largely used in the philosophical speculations of the Roman jurists of the
Antonine age, and was intended to denote a system of rules and principles for the guidance
of human conduct which, INDEPENDENTLY OF ENACTED LAW OR OF THE SYSTEMS
PECULIAR TO ANY ONE PEOPLE, MIGHT BE DISCOVERED BY THE RATIONAL

!489
INTELLIGENCE OF MAN, AND WOULD BE FOUND TO GROW OUT OF AND
CONFORM TO HIS NATURE, meaning by that word his WHOLE mental, moral, and
physical constitution. The point of departure for this conception was the Stoic doctrine of a
life ordered "ACCORDING TO NATURE," which in its turn rested upon the purely
supposititious existence, in primitive times, of a "state of nature;" that is, a condition of society
in which men universally were governed solely by a national and consistent obedience to
the needs, impulses, AND PROMPTINGS OF THEIR TRUE NATURE, SUCH NATURE
BEING AS YET UNDEFACED BY DISHONESTY, FALSEHOOD, OR INDULGENCE OF
THE BASER PASSIONS. (Black1)

LAW OF NATURE - The law of nature is THAT WHICH GOD, THE SOVEREIGN OF THE
UNIVERSE, HAS PRESCRIBED TO ALL MEN, not by any formal promulgation, but by the
internal dictate of reason alone. It is discovered by a just consideration of the agreeableness
or disagreeableness of human actions to the nature of man; AND IT COMPREHENDS ALL
THE DUTIES WHICH WE OWE either to the Supreme Being, to ourselves, or to our
neighbors; as reverence to God, self-defense, temperance, honor to our parents, benevolence to
all, a strict adherence to our engagements, gratitude, and the like.

2. The primitive laws of nature may be reduced to six, namely: 1. Comparative sagacity, or
reason. 2. SELF-LOVE. 3. The attraction of the sexes to each other. 4. The tenderness of
parents towards their children. 5. The religious sentiment. 6. Sociability…

3. - 1. When man is properly organized, he is able to discover moral good from moral
evil; and the study of man proves that man is not only an intelligent, but a free being, and
he is therefore RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS ACTIONS. The judgment we form of our
good actions, produces happiness; on the contrary the judgment we form of our bad
actions produces unhappiness.

4. - 2. Every animated being is IMPELLED BY NATURE to his own preservation, to

defend his life and body from injuries, to shun what may be hurtful, and to provide all
things requisite to his existence. Hence THE DUTY TO WATCH OVER HIS OWN
PRESERVATION. Suicide and duelling are therefore contrary to this law; and A MAN
CANNOT MUTILATE HIMSELF, NOR RENOUNCE HIS LIBERTY.

5. - 3. The attraction of the sexes has been provided FOR THE PRESERVATION OF
THE HUMAN RACE, and this law condemns celibacy. The end of marriage proves that
polygamy, (q. v.) and polyendry, (q. v.) are contrary to the law of nature. Hence it follows
that THE HUSBAND AND WIFE HAVE A MUTUAL AND EXCLUSIVE RIGHT OVER
EACH OTHER.

6. - 4. Man from his birth is wholly unable to provide for the least of his necessities; but
the love of his parents supplies for this weakness. This is one of the most powerful
laws of nature. THE PRINCIPAL DUTIES IT IMPOSES ON THE PARENTS, are to
bestow on the child all the care its weakness requires, to provide for its necessary food and
clothing, to instruct it, to provide for its wants, and to use coercive means for its good,
when requisite.

7. - 5. THE RELIGIOUS SENTIMENT WHICH LEADS US NATURALLY TOWARDS

THE SUPREME BEING, is one of the attributes which belong to humanity alone; and its
importance gives it the rank of THE MORAL LAW OF NATURE. From this sentiment
arise all the sects and different forms of worship among men.

8. - 6. The need which man feels to live in society, is one of the primitive laws of nature,
whence ßow our duties and rights; AND THE EXISTENCE OF SOCIETY DEPENDS
UPON THE CONDITION THAT THE RIGHTS OF ALL SHALL BE RESPECTED. On
this law are based the assistance, succors and good ofÞces which men owe to each other,
they being unable to provide each every thing for himself. (Bouv1856)

!490
 LAW - 1. A rule of ACTION DICTATED BY A SUPERIOR BEING. The command of a
SUPERIOR. A command addressed BY THE SOVEREIGN OF THE STATE TO HIS
SUBJECTS, IMPOSING DUTIES, AND ENFORCED BY PUNISHMENTS. Laws are made
for the GOVERNMENT OF ACTIONS. The parts of a law are: the "declaratory" part, which
deÞnes the right to be observed and the wrong to be eschewed; the "directory" part, which
enjoins observance of the right and abstaining from the wrong; the “remedial” part (as
remedy), which provides a method to recover a right or to redress a wrong; and, the
"vindicatory" part (as sanction), which prescribes the penalty for a transgression. 3. In an
important use "law" EXCLUDES THE METHODS AND REMEDIES PECULIAR TO
EQUITY AND ADMIRALTY, and conÞnes the idea to the action of tribunals proceeding BY
FIXED RULES, and employing remedies OPERATIVE DIRECTLY UPON THE PERSON OR
PROPERTY of the individual; as, in the expressions, a court of law, a remedy at law, an
action at law, at law. Compare Common Law. 3. A POSITIVE LAW; an enactment; AN ACT
OF THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT A STATUTE. 4. "Law" and "the
law" frequently refer to systematized rules of action, —the science of jurisprudence as a study
or a profession. The primary end of law is TO MAINTAIN AND REGULATE THE
ABSOLUTE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS. The law is A SCIENCE which distinguishes the
criterions of right and wrong, and teaches to establish the one and to prevent, punish, or
redress the other. Locke's division of law: DIVINE LAW—THE LAW OF GOD, NATURAL
OR REVEALED; civil law—THE MUNICIPAL LAW; LAW OF REPUTATION—morality.
Austin's division: divine law—the revealed law of God; positive human law — municipal
law; positive morality—morality; laws metaphorically so called— the laws of animate and
inanimate nature. The "laws of a state" usually mean the rules and enactments promulgated
by the legislative authority thereof, or long established local customs having the force of laws.
THE DECISIONS OF THE COURTS ARE ONLY EVIDENCE OF WHAT THE LAWS ARE.
The term “laws” includes not only written expressions of the governing will, but also all other
rules of property and conduct in which the supreme power exhibits, and according to which
it exerts, its governmental FORCE. (WCA1889)

—=—

Note that the Stoic conformation to Nature is somewhat similar in functionality to the satanic
doctrine. While satanism embraces the corruption of Nature and its Laws, to give in to the
impulses of the baser instincts, the fault of this Stoic lifestyle lies mostly in the presumption of
some virtually non-existent form and legend of the incorruptible man. But just as Þction is not a thing
of Natural Existence, neither too is non-Þction. One, of course, presupposes the existence of the
other. In other words, we are describing a Life without God, without conscious and permanent
(religious) application of the Word (Law) that springs forth our only inherent, Natural Reason. We
must remember that all men are corruptible, including ourselves, and that this is due to man’s
actions without regard to this Higher capacity of Reason, and the application of It as Law. Self-
acknowledgement of this, which the church calls as our proneness to sin, must take place and be
consciously present in all of our choices. We must know our own weaknesses, and we must over-
come them not just once but on a daily, even hourly routine.

It is also interesting to note that the so-called “debate” on such aspects as “gay-rights” and “same-
sex marriage” can be squashed in one sitting through this under-standing of Natural Law. Homo-
sexuality, whether it indeed be a Natural condition of Being or a dis-ease of that Being in Nature, is
actually not at all the point. The purpose of marriage is only to beneÞt the bloodline of oneÕs own
posterity. It is indeed Naturally impossible for such blood to be passed through homosexual inter-
course. This is not a procreative act, and can therefore produce nothing of God (Nature). Take the
moral, civil, and religious crap-fest out of the debate, and all we are left with is that which is
certainly not of or in support of the Natural Law, as what is opposed (adversarial) to pro-creation,
and therefore that which is not therefore a Natural Right of God. No duty to God or man is being
fulÞlled in any way. And so this cannot be said to be a Natural Law (inherent) reason to be married
under God’s Natural Law. The marriage is not a promise (vow) to God, but merely a secular con-
tract with the state. To be clear, this is not the opinion of the author, but again stands as merely the

!491
self-evident Truth. It is one thing to bear fruit with no seed as a defect of the Natural body. It is an
entirely different matter to purposefully avoid that which will produce any fruit at all. In this way
alone can we say homosexuality is “un-Natural,” which merely means that it is not in accordance
with the Laws of Nature. The purpose of Life is continued Life (eternal Life), the passing of the
reason for Life, the blood. In modern terms, this lifestyle is unsustainable towards Life Itself. This is
not a matter of the state. This is not in any way a legal issue. It is in fact a non-issue. And that’s the
point! It is a lack of responsibility to carry on the species (issues), and nothing else. Adoption, while
noble, is not a fulÞllment of duty nor of law, and is often not too different to the mind than obtain-
ing a pet. This is part of the self-responsibility aspect of the Natural Law. When it comes to Life,
men must function as men are Designed, both as male and as female. This is the self-evident
Natural Law. Be they moral, ethical, emotional, steeped in fairness or bound up in some imaginary
legal “right,” all other considerations are irrelevant to the Reality of God’s Nature and Law and
manÕs duty to uphold it. What is Naturally Right (Lawful) is never to be deÞned by what is a
legally licensed (man-made) and granted right in Þction. NEVER!

If one were to have queried christ in the Bible about this subject, I’m sure his parable would be
indefatigable. It would not be personal, but simply show the inevitable death of the blood ßowing
through generations and generations of children that will Þnally end by such an illegitimate,
unfruitful (seedless) union of men. The story is not about the actions or Lives lived by such homo-
sexual men, but of the absolute destitution of any possible fruitful result by that unnatural union.
The incredible story of their blood and DNA simply ends with them.

Do we even need to talk about ÒartiÞcialÓ insemination? Technological procreation without Love?

As a Þnal point to this particularly controversial and taboo subject, remember that we are speaking
of Natural Law and no other. Public claims and titles like “gay” and “lesbian” and “straight” have
no place in Nature. They are terms of art, of id-entity, are slang at best, and do not Exist anywhere
but in the minds of men as ßattering titles. They are no excuse. However you are Created or
chemically and mentally altered on the inside, you still have a sacred responsibility to uphold the
Law to all others as all others do to you. However, this duty also includes the act of procreation, of
the continuation of eternal Life Itself. There is no prejudice or shame being proposed here, nor even
any lifestyle, only the self-evident Truth. The second anyone claims rights for only one select group
of persons (status) such as “gay,” then the very equitableness and True equality sought for is
destroyed, and the very status you seek becomes a tyranny over all others. Any respect or progress
garnered can only be forced and thus false. And nothing forced will ever be Truly, Naturally
respected or under-stood by any man.

The question one must always ask about such things is this: why am I publicly exclaiming such a
private thing? The answer, you will Þnd, can only be that you seek some artiÞcial thing, some legal
beneÞt or right from the public sphere and its taxpayers. This fact extends to all Òspecial interestsÓ
and other titles of public ßattery, just as Tytler warned above as to the “democratic” manipulation
and looting of the public treasury. When any man (in persona) states that I Am “___” and therefore
I deserve special treatment, then equity and Natural equality and right under God is destroyed,
and only resentment and apathy may follow from one’s peers. If you forgot already the theme of
this work, it is simply to keep it private, dude. Public marriage is not private. And “gay marriage”
is only ever a tool to gain public title and beneÞts. You will attain what you seek in that legal (anti-
God) realm, which for most is an outright curse. If you are True to your Self, take a vow to God and
a promise to each other, but never contract with the state, for to do so requires you to do so in its
property (persona). This already breaks from the Law of God, to respect no persons, and so no legal
marriage between persons can ever actually be holy or legitimate in the eyes of God. To claim
otherwise is paradoxical and anti-Nature.

PARADOX - noun - [Gr. beyond, and opinion; to or suppose.] A tenet or proposition contrary
to received opinion, or seemingly absurd, YET TRUE IN FACT. A gloss there is to color that
paradox and MAKE IT APPEAR IN SHOW NOT TO BE ALTOGETHER
UNREASONABLE. (Webs1828)

!492
 GLOSS - noun - [Gr. the tongue, and a strap. Latin has glossa, a tongue, and interpretation. In
Hebrew signiÞes TO SHINE, but from the sense of smoothness. Latin lustro; Eng. luster.] 1.
Brightness or luster of a body proceeding from a smooth surface; as the gloss of silk; cloth is
calendared to give it a gloss. 2. A SPECIOUS APPEARANCE OR REPRESENTATION;
EXTERNAL SHOW THAT MAY MISLEAD OPINION. It is no part of my secret meaning to
set on the face of this cause any fairer gloss than the naked truth doth afford. 3. AN
INTERPRETATION ARTFULLY SPECIOUS. 4. Interpretation; comment; explanation;
remark intended to illustrate a subject. All this, without a gloss or comment, He would
unriddle in a moment. Explaining the text in short glosses. 5. A LITERAL TRANSLATION. -
verb transitive - To give a superÞcial luster to; to make smooth and shining; as, to gloss cloth by
the calendar; to gloss mahogany. 1. To explain; to render clear and evident by comments; to
illustrate. 2. TO GIVE A SPECIOUS APPEARANCE TO; TO RENDER SPECIOUS AND
PLAUSIBLE; to palliate by specious representation. You have the art to gloss the foulest
cause. - verb intransitive - To comment; to write or make explanatory remarks. 1. To make sly
remarks. (Webs1828)

GLOSS - An interpretation, consisting of one or more words, interlinear or marginal; an

annotation, explanation, or comment on any passage in the text of a work, for purposes of
elucidation or ampliÞcation. Particularly applied to the comments on the Corpus Juris.
(Black4)

GLOSSA - Latin. A gloss, explanation, or interpretation. The glossae of the Roman law are
brief illustrative comments or annotations on the text of Justinian's collections, made by the
professors who taught or lectured on them about the twelfth century (especially at the law
school of Bologna), and were hence called "glossators." These glosses were at Þrst inserted in
the text with the words to which they referred, and were called "glossae interlinares;" but
afterwards they were placed in the margin, partly at the side, and partly under the text, and
called "glossae marginales.” A selection of them was made by Accursius, between A. D. 1220 and
1260, under the title of "glossae Ordinaria" which is of the greatest authority. (Black4)

GLOSSARY - noun - [Low Latin glossarium.] A dictionary or vocabulary, explaining obscure

or antiquated words found in old authors; such as Du Canage's Glossary; Spelman's glossary.
(Webs1828)

GLOSSATOR - A commentator or annotator OF THE ROMAN LAW. One of the authors of

the Gloss. (Bouv1856)

—=—

Gloss, or glossa, is a term used to describe the incredibly slippery slope of word magic. It is applied
to such legally sacred (cursed) works as “style manuals” of languages. Glossa is what makes a legal
term legal, and an English word dog-Latin. Gloss alters the intent and meaning of any word, and is
used by authors to ensure the clarity of what is being expressed by such words, which is the reason
for margin notes and glossaries. Unfortunately for us, the Bible was of course greatly glossed over
by the King’s translators and by modern “versions,” so that its parabolic intent is mistaken by most
literalist readers lacking due diligence towards Its transliterated style.

“United States,” for instance, is a style. In contracts, treaties, and court cases, its style is written as
ÒUNITED STATES.Ó This use of all-capital letters signiÞes a Þctional thing in a different language.
If ÒJOHN SMITHÓ is called to court, the judge will Þrst seek to correct the record by having ÒJohn
SmithÓ or his agent consent to the style alteration, the mixture of Þction and Nature. As this is an
in-depth topic, I invite the reader to study the various style manuals of language, which are
searchable on the internet and available at some libraries.

The author wishes only that his work be taken without the gloss of those apologists of so many arts
and religions out there, that my commentaries lead one only to the polished, self-evident but never

!493
specious Truth, and that my own interpretations are regarded only by the Light of that self-evident
luster of God’s Nature and Reason (purpose) in Law.

Let us not get further off track with such foolish political debates here, for we must focus on the
understanding that the purpose of marriage has always been for the singular reason of passing on
estate to legitimate heirs by blood kinship. Homosexual or heterosexual, this is one area where we
have been robed and pirated from equally. Marriage today is merely a well-intentioned but empty,
legal (anti-God) ritual we participate in from within the community chest while going round and
round indeÞnitely in circles on the Monopoly board. Today, most all marriages are fruitless (with-
out legitimate seed/heir) and thus without substance as to the origin of their ceremonial purpose.


At this point, it should be impossible for even the most ardent atheist to doubt that this word
ÒgodÓ is at the foundation and artiÞcial heart of all law, be it in honor of or in pretended licensed
escape from that binding duty to that Highest Authority we call as God. And of course any pre-
scribed law is that of the law of a particular sovereign and thus supreme authoritative being, as
one or a group in body politic who’s false persona and status is respected by those beneath it. In
other words, a false god (magistrate); the father(s)… And so we must consciously focus on the
duality of words, especially with this word “god.” For the author cannot stress enough here that no
matter what system of law the reader chooses to follow, irrespective of his publicly proclaimed
status of corporate, legalized “religion,” his god will only actually be considered to be the source of
that law he respects. This is to say only that the law of one god (creator) destroys the protective
aspect of any other when followed.

—=—

“...anyone who PARTAKES of the beneÞts or privileges of a given

statute, or anyone who even places himself into a POSITION where he
may avail himself of those beneÞts at will, CANNOT REACH
CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS TO REDRESS GRIEVANCES IN THE
COURTS AGAINST THE GIVEN STATUTE. (The Court will not pass
upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has
availed himself of its beneÞts.)”



—#6 of “The Ashwander Principles,” Ashwander v. T.VA., 287 U.S. 288, 56 S.Ct. 466, compiled by Justice Louis D. Brandeis as a set of principles used by the
United States Supreme Court for avoiding constitutional rulings.

—=—

“MAN'S LAW IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH GOD'S LAW”

ÒJudges, politicians, and other government ofÞcers, in both their

personal and professional capacities, are often faced with decisions
THAT PIT MAN'S LAWS AGAINST GOD'S LAWS. As the laws of the
United States become more and more adverse to the tenets and
teachings of the Bible, the number of faith conßicts for Christian judges
will only become more numerous. It is this problem that led many
Christians to question WHETHER OR NOT CHRISTIAN JUDGES
CAN FAITHFULLY SERVE GOD AND STILL FAITHFULLY ADHERE
TO THEIR JUDICIAL OATH.”

!494
 “The discussion regarding what a Christian judge should do when
personal beliefs conßict with the secular law has been limited. The legal
community has focused largely on recusal for religious beliefs: whether
an openly pro-life evangelical Christian or an anti-death penalty
Catholic perspective forces one to recuse oneself when deciding a case
that concerns the respective view. Commentators generally agree that
religion should not mandate recusal, BUT THAT JUDGES SHOULD
RECUSE THEMSELVES IF THEIR BELIEFS DO NOT PERMIT A FAIR
APPLICATION OF THE SECULAR LAW.”
—University of St. Thomas Law Journal, Volume 2, Issue 1, Article 9, entitled: “God's Law and Man's Law: Can They Peacefully Co-Exist in the Life of a
Christian Appellate Judge?” by: Karin A. Moore

—=—

A fair application of sin?

The entirety of man’s law is designed to devolve man in consideration into a lesser state of Being,
to take away the implied spiritual duty, rights, and personal responsibility of the Natural Law of
God. Embracing that which is unnatural Þguratively destroys that which is the Creator of Nature
and Its Law in that pretended legal jurisdiction. And so the Þnal word on the subject of what ÒlawÓ
is can only be deÞned as the worship of a god, for the worship of law is the respect of the authority
of its maker. Thus anarchy (lawlessness) can only be in Reality godlessness. This can only be Truly
comprehended by those willing to suffer at least somewhat their own ego-death, the ego being
merely the result of a legal persona instilled into the minds of men that causes the ÒagenticÓ mind-
set. And so we Þnd that ego-death can only be True with the abandonment of manÕs designs of
artiÞce and law, the disrespect of all persons and titles in Þction. For to respect a sovereign other
than the Nature of Jehovah (verb) necessarily requires a lack of Self-respect. To respect the false,
legally created id-entity of some legally appointed/anointed god (noun/ßattering title) over that
origin of the Source of even our own mind, body, and soul is to admit the defeat of our Selves; to
acknowledge that we are unable to govern our True Spiritual Self.

To be embarrassed to admit or speak about God is perhaps the most pathetic state of being for any
man, for he will be governed not by that which he refuses to acknowledge and instead by that
father (nation) that created the false persona he was entrained within. For you see, to be afraid to
talk about God is to be afraid to talk about the origin and foundation of Self. Nothing could be
more powerful to the archons that seek to rule over men than the ability to magically produce such
a devastating fallacy and fear within men that they should be frightened to speak of their Creator,
as that from which all of their power and True Right against the legal state comes from. That, my
friends, is the most brilliant marketing trick by the devil I can imagine. All the laws of these false
gods (idols) of the nations control only their own created persons (legal names), not any man who
fends off such artiÞce and stands under the only True Law and Its Source. But how does one fend
off false gods without Þrst acknowledging and Þghting in all things in behalf and in protection of
the only True Nature of Jehovah? How can a god be said to be false if no Highest God of Nature is
acknowledged before it? How can any law be illegitimate if the only True Legitimacy of God and
Its Self-evident Law is not Þrst recognized? Here logic and reason reigns only in the Name of
Jehovah! Regardless of what choice we make, we will always be governed by some god (God). This
is the Ultimate choice that each man must make, and whatever path is chosen, his entirety of Being
in action must reßect that choice under that sovereign Law. However, understanding that all other
law is false, a false show, a false choice based on lies and subterfuge, is also part of that conscious
choice. The choice to live in a civil life of evil (artiÞce) under anotherÕs personhood has been turned
into a seemingly inescapable, cultural causality, automatically assigned by our unwitting parents
for us from birth and through public licensure, as cattle led unaware through a slaughter-house.

!495
Inversely, we may ask just what was the intent of the teachings transcribed through Jesus christ as
the Word (Law) of Jehovah? That all men are actually, Naturally Equal unless they become
Þctionally activated as part and person of these nations of false gods. That all men are of the blood
of Jesus christ, and therefore of Jehovah, and that no gods should be taken or respected above our
very own Source of Life (blood) in Nature. That men must govern their own minds with the
scriptural knowledge of the ancients, those parabolic teachings of christ, so that no man would be
slave to any sovereign king or proclaimed ÒchosenÓ People, and only to the Oneness of the True
God and Word (Son).

We must move on here, but the reader must comprehend and acknowledge that the origin of every
god, of every nation and kingdom of man, and of every law-set created by said gods all have their
origins in this one word, transliterated as Òparable.Ó Just as the beginning of history is told in the
ambiguous, non-detailed, fabled form of its perceived genesis (beginning), so too are every history
book and every religious tome, including the Bible, a parable. But only one of these is Designed of
God, of the self-evident Truth of Nature, of Reality, and only one is designed to allow us the know-
ledge to remain forever (in eternity) within this realm of Jehovah (heaven). All other secondary
sources (secondary to the scriptural allegory), including many ÒversionsÓ of the bible, are merely
misleading fables; intentional lies told for no good reason except to beneÞt the few who stand to
gain from the modern religious worship and acceptance of their ÒmoralÓ story of fabled genealogy
as their own posterity. These, as the Bible states, are all antichrists (also transcribed as: phrenapatēs -
mind deceivers, seducers), creating that which is antithetical to the christ story and spiritual
teachings of our own potentiality thereof, and even to the Nature of Reality Itself.

Again, it is so simple, merely follow the Law (Word) by the example of the Son and take no other
doctrine (law). To follow only the Law of the Nature (the Source) of what Exists causes man to be
immune from the arts and artiÞce, free from even his own lies. If that is the simplicity of True
Christianity, sign me up!

—=—

“BUT REFUSE PROFANE AND OLD WIVES' FABLES, AND EXERCISE

THYSELF rather unto godliness.”
—1Timothy 4:7, KJB

—=—

“For there are many unruly and VAIN TALKERS AND DECEIVERS,
specially they of the circumcision: Whose mouths must be stopped, WHO
SUBVERT WHOLE HOUSES, teaching things which they ought not, for
Þlthy lucre's (gain, advantage) sake. One of themselves, even a prophet of
their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. This
witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in
the faith; NOT GIVING HEED TO JEWISH FABLES, AND
COMMANDMENTS OF MEN, THAT TURN FROM THE TRUTH. Unto
the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are deÞled and unbelieving
IS NOTHING PURE; but even their mind and conscience is deÞled. THEY
PROFESS THAT THEY KNOW GOD; BUT IN WORKS THEY DENY HIM,
being abominable (idolotrous), and disobedient, and unto every good work
reprobate.”
—Titus 1: 10-16, KJB

—=—

!496
How many times do each of us use the excuse that some action we partake in while acting as a
hireling in persona under another’s employment is just my job, or in the voluntary servitude of
public citizen-ship is just the way it is? Another word for this, as used above, is works.

Strong's #G2041 - ergon (ἔργον) - WORKS - From a primary (but obsolete) ergo (TO WORK),
used in the scriptures 176 times as the following words: work (152x), deed (22x), doing (1x),
labour (1x).

Outline of Biblical Usage:

1. Business, EMPLOYMENT, that which any one is OCCUPIED.

A. That which one UNDERTAKES to do, ENTERPRISE, UNDERTAKING.
2. Any PRODUCT whatever, any thing accomplished BY HAND, ART, INDUSTRY, OR
MIND.
3. AN ACT, DEED, thing done: the idea of working is emphasized in opposition to that
which is less than work.

—=—

To be employed by another is to be “used” by another for gain. There is no such thing in Nature as
fair employment or fair wage, for money has no actual value and so trading time (labor) for money
is a fruitless adventure for any man. While pirates used to commit theft outright by boarding an-
other’s ship, these modern pirates provide the ship (person) and tax for its use. What they take
they provide a paper representation of in the form of money, credit, etc. In other words, they pro-
vide only form while extracting all substance, leaving the common employee with nothing except
receipt of paper, be it money itself or public, defective paper title to the private property of another.
The gain of the person is the gain of the principal, not the agent. And so whatever money that is
paid for services rendered (voluntary servitude), that money being the sole property of government
and issued with nothing Real backing it (printed out of thin air), is immediately re-circulated
(spent) at what essentially amounts to the company store — at one of the thousands of corporations
owned by the private elite we have been made totally dependent upon. You could say we live in a
giant, national company town.

If par is the word for being of an equal condition, and able is the word for strength of mind and
body, then scriptural parables (pro-verbs) are obviously told in order to enlighten man as either
how to be christ-like or how not to. This, as a parabolic attesting and instructive verb of action (pro-
verb), is not attained by going to a corporate church every Sunday in name only. One must walk in
the footsteps of christ, not just admire the footsteps from afar or in some framed Dollar Store
picture hung over the mantle while pretending to walk that path, and paying institutional religious
tithing to mammon for not doing so when the collection plate comes around.

—=—

“LET NO MAN DECEIVE HIMSELF. If any man among you seemeth to be

wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. FOR THE
WISDOM OF THIS WORLD IS FOOLISHNESS WITH GOD. For it is
written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord
knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. THEREFORE LET NO
MAN GLORY IN MEN. For all things are yours; Whether Paul, or Apollos,
or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come;
ALL ARE YOURS; AND YE ARE CHRIST'S; AND CHRIST IS GOD’S.”
—1 Corinthians 3: 18-23, KJB

—=—

!497
 —=—

“And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto
carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not
with meat: FOR HITHERTO YE WERE NOT ABLE TO BEAR IT,
NEITHER YET NOW ARE YE ABLE. FOR YE ARE YET CARNAL: for
whereas there is among you envying, and strife, AND DIVISIONS, are
ye not carnal, and walk as men?”
—1 Corinthians 3: 1-3, KJB

—=—

We must consider perspective here as well, for the pope and Catholic (universal “Christian”)
church will twist these verses so as to destroy their spiritual intent, where the pope is called as the
vicar of and replacement of (anti-) christ on earth (of the ßesh/world) in ßattering title, and so many
are tricked into deceiving themselves by putting their faith in that corporation sole instead of in
what is the self-evidence of GodÕs Nature. For the pope is wise only in worldly, secular things, and
sits upon that corruption as sovereign pontiff over legal, ecclesiastical things of the church’s
corporate jurisdiction, which are foolishness to God. The wisdom of the pope may only make fools
of men, who abandon their own self-evidence of Self-Existence and thus their place (stake) in the
Nature/Creation of Jehovah to embrace that which is purely false. To bear the cross, the symbol of
Romish ÒChristianity,Ó is to bear the sign of a fool that worships symbology, imagery, and
idolatrous gods over the Reality they represent. The cross represents only a manÕs stake in Þction
and false doctrine.

The time has come that we should hear the Word and observe Its Law, no doubt. And perhaps it
took such utter corruption of all things to get to this point. May this work help you to Þnd the
spiritual path, and may my words be taken only with that intent.

Here we Þnd the word men as used in the phrase “walk as men” to actually mean human. StrongÕs
deÞnitions of this word G444 - anthrōpos - ἄνθρω-ος, translated as Òmen,Ó carries the meaning of
“a human being, whether male or female,” and also “with the added notion of WEAKNESS, by
which man is led into a mistake or PROMPTED TO SIN,” and implies “with reference to TWO
FOLD NATURE OF MAN, body and soul, THE CORRUPT AND THE TRULY CHRISTIAN
MAN, CONFORMED TO THE NATURE OF GOD.”

StrongÕs G4559 - sarkikos - σαρκικός, translated above as Òcarnal,Ó carries the following meanings:

1. Fleshly, carnal.
A. Having the nature of ßesh, i.e., under the control of the animal appetites.
1. GOVERNED BY MERE HUMAN NATURE NOT BY THE SPIRIT OF GOD.
2. Having its seat in the animal nature or aroused by the animal nature.
3. HUMAN: with the included idea of depravity.
B. Pertaining to the ßesh.
1. To the body: related to BIRTH, LINAGE, etc.

—=—

In this work, we are taking a journey through both the carnal and the spiritual to show not only the
differences in meanings but also the diabolical similitude of these terms of art. But it is not enough,
as christ spoke above, to simply speak of the spiritual Nature of things. We must feel (Love) It. We
must Live in the Spirit eternally, in everlasting Life without spiritual death in the artiÞce of civil life.
We must not give in to that animal nature if we are to be spiritually Free, religious men and not hu-

!498
mans. One thing is for certain, the words of the Bible cannot be read nor its message deduced by a
mere carnally minded human. And that is its great mystery. For it is the keeper of the secrets of evil
men that seek to destroy God’s spirit of christ in men for no other reason than to control and cheat
them out of their Natural inheritance; to turn all men into mere domesticated animals. That is, until
a public slave like myself spends his disenfranchised Life in search of and Þnding the correct and
self-evident translation.

And so here we must realize the importance of the spiritual Nature of parabolic teaching. The
parables as told in the Bible are only designed to appeal to the spirit, and to hold in contempt the
animalistic nature and temptations of man towards worldly things. It is perhaps the most import-
ant lesson in the Bible that we should all in fact be speaking towards each other as christ did, in
parables, when in the public realm, and especially towards public Þgures of authority. By doing so,
it is impossible to slander or give false advice to any speciÞc person. It is impossible to identify
oneself as anything legal when the answer to any question (Þshing for under-standing and consent
to Þctional authorities) is spoken parabolically. Quite frankly, even the Þrst (God-given) name is a
parable by its nature, unable to stand as a legal entity without some legal surname attached and
conÞrmed to it. A gift of God, that is, all of Creation, cannot be owned by any man. Only the legally
assigned names of things may be owned. And so to answer only to one’s christian name is to
remain ambiguous to all other names (styles/properties/characteristics), for only legal persons
may invoke legal things, and legal laws and properties can only be held by legal titles. To speak
parabolically is to speak in the Purest of ambiguity, as the indirect and spiritual way of Life. Yet
when alone with any True seeker of knowledge, christ spoke from the heart directly to the man in
privacy, thus not needing such parabolic language. In this way, christ was able to never directly
acknowledge the persons and ßattering titles pretended by men, yet at the same time offer personal
wisdom without binding contract or offense to public law. He could speak to the man indirectly,
yet offer a substantive wisdom that is otherwise impossible in any direct application. In other
words, through parables he remained private in public places, even while speaking in and around
public ears. It is impossible to offend any man by speaking indirectly, without speciÞc reference
towards his Þrst or third person, for the self-evident Truth told in the form of potentiality as the
story of what fate any man might suffer due to an unwise or wise course simply cannot be mis-
construed as a personal attack or affront. All men should strive to accomplish this perfection of
communication in verse, an act of Self-preservation and admonishment of all Þctions. But most
men acting in the legal person of the state consider not their own course with wisdom, and thus
seldom are able to spiritually guide any other. When there is no moral choice in one’s choice of law
to follow, then there is no destination that may be found in the spiritual realm of Jehovah. When all
choices are legally (strictly) established and licensed, then no parable may help any man, unless
that man may break free of his false persona and choose the right and spiritual path. And so,
parabolically speaking, it would be safe to say that no man of God may walk the legal path, for his
footsteps would never Be beside those of christ’s example. All legal, commercial paths lead to
Caesar, and a districted person knows no other path than by the Þction of that rendered in
mammon. Only he who renders back to Caesar all respect and use of its property, its persons,
places, and things (nouns), will any man be able to walk the righteous path. Only then will any
man be able to choose his own path. Without choice, the spirit of the Law is dead.

—=—

“But without a parable spake he not unto them: AND WHEN THEY
WERE ALONE, HE EXPOUNDED ALL THINGS to his disciples.”
—Matthew 4:34, KJB

—=—

!499
 —=—

“Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of

heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his Þeld…”
—Matthew 13:24, KJB

—=—

When we are alone with like-minded people of the spirit genuinely interested in sharing and
learning without personal and Þnancial opportunism and without litigious intentions, only then in
that state of the Purest Love and Devotion are we to speak unambiguously. But to the noun that we
call the legally dis-eased Òpublic,Ó that brainwashed hoard that is continuously seeking to in-jure
us into and under manÕs legal matrix of law despite the Word (Son) of God, the parable is the
private manÕs best tool. For within the parable is a patent ambiguity, and so the tale told may Þt
into any manÕs consciousness and may affect every manÕs spirit. No slander can be mistaken in
parabolic speech and no harm or tort can be pretended against any manÕs individual person
(reputation), for the parable respects no person, dealing only in generics and ambiguities. A parable
is not personal, yet potentially the parable applies to all men on a personal, Þrst person (spiritual
Self) level. Thus only the spiritual, not the carnal (worldly) mind may comprehend the moral,
price-less, and timeless value of the parable. A parable is quite useless to the carnally minded led
by the trickery and word magic of legal, Þctional causality. He that is offended by any parable is
likely to have his stake (cross) anchored too strongly in carnal things, even as his ego stirs to defend
that worldly false id-entity.

The Bible is mostly written as a moral fable (an apologue [see deÞnition above]); a collection of
many parabolic tales portraying the story of manÕs probable spiritual entrapment through many
interlocking stories and aphorisms, and is allegorical to the self-evident Truth of manÕs capacity to
fall into legal Þction (the fall of man) and thus out of GodÕs Favor and Grace through the deceit and
trickery of legalistic word-magic. Please take note that this is not an offensive statement to any one
or any thing, except to those corporate, religious institutions that seek to trick man into this state of
Þctional, legal existence and member-ship (agency). To say it another way, the scriptures are the
presentation of the Purest of Wisdom that is not of this world (not for the sophist hu-man), not
tainted by the minds and inventions of manÕs imagination and Þctional recreations, while at the
same time they utilize personiÞed (fabled) men as character examples, just as so many authors
have done throughout history. As it presents this parabolic story of the fall of man into Þction, the
scriptures stand in forewarning of believable, probable, and provable events which have certainly
now in these modern times passed among mankind. The bonds of surety are our virtual reality,
fallen as we are, and we smart (are in pain) for it as is parabolically written as warning in Psalms.
Our current state of being in legal artiÞce is certainly demonstrable to that ancient parabolical
warning of the very debtorÕs hell that today we legally and civilly exist within while ignoring those
scriptural teachings that would save us from such a performance contract of debt-slavery, for all
legal dis-ease is only ever artfully contracted and not of Nature. As with any well-intentioned fable,
the Bible is constructed towards a moral, happy ending for those who realize its offered guidance
and act upon its knowledge without making apologies in excuse for allowing the big legal lie
(satanism) to trump GodÕs Law of Nature and Reality. For those who merely believe (love) it as a
so-called history of ancient past lives, the legal chains are that much stronger in those men stuck in
the timeline of fabled genealogies, ignoring the timelessness of God and the scriptures, for it was
foretold that those who do not act upon these fabled and parabolic warnings of past and future
potentialities and happenings are certainly to pay such a spiritual price.

Whereas the Bible certainly admits of its own fabled, parabolic nature (see below Proverbs) and
storytelling to guide man against the legal and other art forms, the legal law openly admits and
forces known lies to become authoritative truths artiÞcially created, conÞrmed, and ratiÞed, and
then violently enforces, institutionalizes and licenses the actions of apologists for the corporate

!500
legal profession in association (Bar) to justify through licensing that which is inexcusable under
God and under that Law which is Self-evident. We answer Þctionally the afÞrmations of other legal
Þctions (titled persons). We speak to imaginary legal entities as if they are Real. We act as if we are
something else than what we actually are. We believe in (love) the lie.

In avoidance of this end and as if in answer to so many fools such as my former, legally inßuenced
Self, we are taught in Proverbs, another word for parable, to heed the following self-evident
principles:

—=—

“Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto
him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own
conceit…”

“The legs of the lame are not equal: so is a parable in the mouth of fools.
As he that bindeth a stone in a sling, so is he that giveth honour to a
fool. As a thorn goeth up into the hand of a drunkard, so is a parable in
the mouth of fools…”

“AS A DOG RETURNETH TO HIS VOMIT, SO A FOOL RETURNETH

TO HIS FOLLY. Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? There is
more hope of a fool than of him.”
—Proverbs 26: 4-5, 7-9, 11-12 KJB

—=—

It is with great pleasure and spiritual serenity that I take this Book of scriptural parables Þnally to
heart, for I was once the very fool regarded to therein. I was the fool who dismissed the Bible
scriptures without ever actually reading or considering them without such a carnal mind. I was the
fool who listened to and honored fools like myself, following in their foolishness of gloriÞed
Þction, and coveting my own vomitus spew of intellectualist catchphrases not my own. I was the
fool to which this parabolic knowledge was lost against my own conceit. And so in pittance and
with reßexive hope I offer this work so that others may rise from their own foolishness.

I am not selling religion, I am giving freely my Love and Charity, my LifeÕs work so that men may
abandon the false doctrines of religions and take up their very own Source and Love their Selves.

The translation of the word parable in the Greek Lexicon of StrongÕs Concordance is as Strong's
H4912.

H4912 - Mashal: Proverb, parable:


1. Proverb, proverbial saying, aphorism

2. Byword
3. Similitude, parable
4. Poem
5. Sentences of ethical wisdom, ethical maxims

—=—

!501
We never Þnd christ speaking to the public, to the multitude, in any way other than in parabolic
teachings. This fact is spoken of directly, and the wise man may eventually realize that part of
christÕs example is to consciously do the same. In other words, to follow the spiritual path of christ,
one must learn to speak parabolically when confronted by the masses of public-minded and
sovereign-minded persons. The parable defeats even the strongest king, a ßattering title existing
nowhere in Nature, and which rules only over its own Þctional kingdom and thus only over he that
subjects himself to that false title of implied sovereignty.

—=—

“All these things SPAKE JESUS UNTO THE MULTITUDE IN

PARABLES; AND WITHOUT A PARABLE SPAKE HE NOT UNTO
THEM…”
—Matthew 13: 34, KJB

—=—

“This parable spake Jesus unto them: BUT THEY UNDERSTOOD NOT
what things they were which he spake unto them.”
—John 10: 6, KJB

—=—

So much time and wasted energy in foolish discourse and effort is spent trying to prove the Bible as
actual historical fact that no man living in the legal persona of a citizen-ship has ever seemingly
gotten the actual message; that of the attainment of Pure Life Lived only in the Reality of GodÕs
Nature that these Loving parables exclaim. Ironically, the point of a moral fable and of the parables
within require no proof, for they are to any reasonable man obviously to be constructed upon only
self-evident Truths told in the potentiality of story form, aphorisms standing unheeded by the
ignorance of manÕs artful inventions and often in consequence of them, as if the ghosts of ancestors
past have left us with the understanding that their mistakes and stumbling blocks will also be our
own if their moral stories go unheeded. Even the Greek and Roman gods and mythologies were
parabolically told as moral fables, lessons designed to teach the consequences of manÕs foolish
actions. Man has been caused purposefully to suffer greatly for not comprehending and realizing
their purpose and recommended lifestyle, destructively convinced that by scientiÞcally ÒprovingÓ
that the physical presence of that otherworldly ÒGodÓ does not actually Exist, that so too the moral
attached to christÕs Þctional life and path is also dead on its face.

What is written within scripture is not what the priests and ministers of corporate religions tell
their parishioners, for comprehension of such parabolic Truths would utterly destroy the money-
based, corporate church masquerading in the personhood of mammon. Such corporate religions
and the governments that protect their false dialectics (logic) of institutionalized doctrines
(rhetoric) of law based on writings (grammar) unfounded in self-evidence have no connection to
the Bible. They use scripture as art, as furniture, and as a pretended justiÞcation of sin. Be it in
purposeful (voluntary) ignorance or the through the designs of cognitive dissonance, the Truths
behind the scriptures remain hidden by or to those preaching them in their own monied conceit
and behind fancy robes and garments (habits). The church is the nation and the nation is the church
in combination and confederation of conspiracy to keep the society of the mystery (secreted,
occulted knowledge) intact, and all of their gods are idols.

About understanding and comprehension of the Bible scriptures (the ancient, True knowledge) and
the various forms of legal law (false knowledge), perhaps this universal maxim states it bestÉ

!502
 —=—

“NO ONE CAN RIGHTLY UNDERSTAND ANY PART UNTIL HE HAS

READ THE WHOLE again and again.”
PARTEM ALIQUAM RECTE INTELLIGERE NEMO POTEST, ANTEQUAM TOTUM, ITERUM ATQUE ITERUM, PERLEGERIT. 3 Coke, 52. (Black4)

—=—

But then, who’s in their right mind anyway? What man is not conceited in his own perceived and
publicly expressed knowledge (vomit) of the legal law and of scripture? What man does not speak
of these incompletely and with desire and intent only to justify his own actions, even when against
them? For what man out there has Truly accomplished a learning of these as a whole? DeÞnitely
not this author, and certainly no licensed priest of mammon. And so let us continue in our
examination of the whole, with the humility of knowing even our Selves to be only the parts.

Some may argue the legalistic “fact” that the Bible is indeed a fable, and that therefore this legal
ÒfactÓ disqualiÞes it as a legitimate source of knowledge. And to this man this would seem to be a
reasonable, or rather purely logical statement, carnal and without spirit. But one cannot challenge
those contemptible demands for proof-based opinion unless one suffers the conceit of fools in their
own folly. Only artiÞcial things need be proven, and fools somehow believe in the artiÞce of legal
Þction while ignoring that which certainly proves they are fools acting in voluntary ignorance. For
if proof were the only qualiÞcation for the legitimacy of a moral law, then as a professed skeptic I
would be required to also summarily dismiss every other moral tale, fable, nursery rhyme, story,
parable, poem, science Þction, fantasy, law, and any and all other tools of moral expression and
learning in education as well. This is to say that I must dismiss all cultural and historical
documents and totally abandon the most ancient form of passing on knowledge from father to son,
mother to daughter, elder to apprentice, and chiefdom to tribe. To ignore the moral teaching of the
Bible as fable without ignoring all other sources of fabled moral teaching would be at the very least
hypocritical, and at the worst… well, we are perhaps already living in one of the worse outcome-
based projections of such selective ignorance by a collection of unwitting fools today in this utterly
corrupt legal law society, exactly as foretold in that scriptural allegory and its parables.

A legal Þction of (creation of) manÕs legal (positive) law is not the same as a moral, Þctional story
expressing the unwritten (negative) Law of Nature, for no morals Exist within legal considerations.
Legal creation is purposefully anti-moral, and at the very best amoral. You will not Þnd, for in-
stance, Plato’s ‘Cave’ or Twain’s ‘Huckleberry Finn’ upon the legal bookshelves, any more than you
might Þnd a legal dictionary in a kindergarten classroom stashed prominently among the Dr Seuss
collection.

Men have always told stories, passing them on from generation to generation for the beneÞt of all
other men in generations to come. This is the immortal duty of men to their offspring. This is the
unwritten law. But evil men create legal Þction only to enslave all other men, to purposefully
destroy that spiritual, parabolic knowledge, a moral crime against God’s very Nature. This is the
written law, the lex scripta of Rome. The scriptures are certainly not legal Þction, for they instruct
man to avoid such artiÞces. They are the parables of how to Live under a moral law without need
of such legal Þction to guide their actions in pure corruption. And as I have seen Þrst hand, the
Bible when used correctly is like holy water to those parasitic, legal vampires in government, for
they all know and respect the Higher Law when it is thrust upon them, and their use of it in
swearing oaths contradicts the very Bible they swear them upon. This act of swearing oath upon
the Bible is an act of contempt to God by the swearer (pledger), a disgrace upon that book of law
that disrespects the scriptural teachings and justiÞes the legal Þction to be in a supra (super-Natural,
above Nature) state above God’s Law. The swearing of an oath to man’s legal creation upon the
Bible is merely a veriÞcation that man is a legal sinner, appearing in the sin (syn) of the artiÞce of
personhood while taking God’s Name in vain.

!503
For the beneÞt of the reader, please note that the words he, his, man (homo), and men are gender
neutral throughout this work, just as they are and were in days of old, and are today within the
legal art and higher language arts. It is only the conceit and designs of man that the sexes would be
considered as separate, for again the beauty and wonder of the sexes are self-evident Truths that
need not manÕs artiÞce to differentiate them. Remember, the legal realm respects no thing in
Reality, seeking to Þctionalize all attributes of It, and so its terms are purely descriptive of legal
status. Sex is not a status, it is a gift of God. The legal word sex is not referential to Reality but only
to standing under legal law. A female man (homo) must admit and consent to being of a legal status
called wo-man, which is purely a legal, artiÞcially, positively applied trait of a Þctional persona in
legal law. And only in the constrained stylings of legality is ÒmanÓ always a ÒpersonÓ that is
ÒmaleÓ only. More on this laterÉ

HE - Properly a pronoun of the masculine gender, but commonly construed IN STATUTES

TO INCLUDE BOTH SEXES AS WELL AS CORPORATIONS. May be read ÒtheyÓ. (Black4)

MAN - A HUMAN BEING. A PERSON of the male sex. A male of the human species above
the age of puberty. In its most extended sense the term includes not only the adult male sex
of the human species, BUT WOMEN AND CHILDREN. In feudal law, A VASSAL; A
TENANT OR FEUDATORY. The Anglo-Saxon RELATION OF LORD AND MAN was
originally PURELY PERSONAL, and founded on mutual CONTRACT. (Black4)

MANHOOD - In feudal law, a term denoting the ceremony of DOING HOMAGE BY THE
VASSAL TO HIS LORD. The formula used was, "Devenio vester homo," I become your man. To
arrive at manhood means to arrive at twenty-one years of age. (Black4)

MANCEPS - Latin. In Roman law, A PURCHASER; one who took the article sold in his
hand; a formality observed in certain sales. A FARMER OF THE PUBLIC TAXES. (Black4)

—=—

It should disturb you that a corporation can be referred to as Òhe.Ó And yet, this is the perfect
example of how the legal wordsmiths may warp Nature into their own image without substance.

Here again we Þnd a duel intent at the heart of every word, as either a man of (Creation of) God or
a man (slave) in feud. A public citizen-ship to any nation and its gods is always the second and
lowest of these intentions. And she who identiÞes her Self as a legally declared Òwo-manÓ in manÕs
system of artiÞcial law instantly enters into manhood, becoming by that ßattering title a
subservient subject to man and his contracts of law, a man (serf) with a womb. Womb-manÉ Wo-
man is a term of art with only an artfully assigned value to produce more subjects in the form of
abandoned children born of the nation (father) through the informing of her legal person. A man
(female) who claims to be legally under the style of ÒwomanÓ is a greater fool than any other
worshiper of false, ßattering titles. And yet this status of legal wo-man-hood seems like such a
normal aspect of our public social conditioning, including the controlled opposition known as the
feminist Òmovement,Ó that to most females (men) in the franchise of citizen-ship it would be an
absurdity to be called by any other Þctional status, let alone by what is Real. Custom, it seems,
contributes more than anything to such public-mindedness as this, to a certainty that Þction is
Reality. Man created the term and status of ÒwomanÓ to forever separate the sexes by Þction, just as
a man created high heels and bustiers for similarly exploitive reasons. There can never be equal
rights when any man, male or female, takes upon oneÕs Self any form of ßattering title such as this.

And so here again we see choice, where man is either considered carnally or spiritually. But we Þnd
that all the petty arguments over deÞning terms can only come from the carnal mind, which seeks
to establish a false show and appearance of man as something he is not, as a legally recreated
Þctional character that may be governed by systems not of his own Nature. The man in and under
the law of any and every contract is no longer a man of the Pure Spirit of God in Nature. There are
no exceptions.

!504
The slaveholder historically called his slave his man. And so here we can again apply our verb/
noun differential test. For to be a man of God is to be in action (verb) as a man Living and thus
acting under (manifesting) God’s Law in God’s Nature, as a spiritual Slave to God’s Design and
will (testament). But to be a “man” in persona and status is to be a noun (person) considered only
as hu-man, a lesser being than man and without God’s Law and protective Spirit; a sophist animal
or beast. Thus, a man in noun (name/persona) form must have distinctions like “white,” “wo-
man,” and “negro” to differentiate the legal status and false rights attributed to that attainted or
untainted legal entity in surety, in order to build a Þctional class structure based on the pretended
legal coloring or tincture of blood as corrupted (attainted = stained). The Þctional title (class) of
“wo-man” is a legally corruptive coloring (a rendering by Caesar of one as infamous).

Remember that this is only Þction, and I am only the neutral messenger. Among all men of God,
male and female, there is only Natural Equality, and only when free from legal mark, title, class,
and other blemishes. Woman-hood is voluntary offered and taken status (persona). No man, male
or female, is born as a “woman” (noun). Among all citizen-ships of the nation, there is only in-
equality re-labeled as “equal rights.” A man has no inequality unless he or she acts in the third
person instead of the Þrst (Self). All inequality stems from the legal law and nowhere else and is
manifested though false id-entity, for all other sources thereof are avoidable. Personhood is
unavoidable, that is, as long as man consents to being called as a “woman” she will either be higher
or lower in status than her male counterpart in any persona, or she will legally receive “rights” that
oppress all other men so as to cause false, satanic (the opposite of) True equality under man’s law.
And in today’s confusion of gender as a political weapon, even the male of the species may now
legally be called as ÒwomanÓ (noun/ßattering title). A free, spiritual man, male or female, needs no
such ßattering titles such as man or woman, for these represented attributes are already of God’s
Design of Nature and so are negatively Self-evident. They need no proof in Reality, only in legality
(Þction). They are only artful words. Womanhood, like personhood, is just another legal trick that
induces man into contract to seek legally assigned beneÞts from false gods. A man with visibly
dark skin is also but a man of God. A man who is called slave by other men is a conquered
“negro” (a reference to dirty or tainted blood-right, not skin color) and therefore the property or
legal “man” of another in noun (name) form as a feudal beast of burden. For a man to be enslaved
or indentured, the verb that is his action of being must be reconsidered and thus reconstituted as a
person or thing (noun). For to consider only his True unalienable Nature under God would be to
destroy any legal consideration or false identity in borrowed surname. More on this later…

—=—

“The act of February 27, 1868, like the Code of 1849, provided that ‘every
PERSON having one-fourth or more NEGRO BLOOD shall be deemed’
A COLORED PERSON.”
ÑBlackÕs Law Dictionary, deÞnition for ÔcolorÕ

—=—

This has nothing to do with skin color and everything to do with purity of bloodlines. There is no
actual color in law, and the artful term Òcolor of lawÓ refers only to its Þctional nature and false
authority. Thus itÕs a gloss to use these legal terms incorrectly, just as the legal intent of the glossa of
a “white person” is only a reference to bloodline, not skin color. Again, Barack Obama is not black
in law, his person is ÒwhiteÓ due to his genealogy. Obviously this is all Þction (color) of law. To call
this as racism is vulgar, and is really missing the point, especially when one considers the incredible
amount of “black” slave-holders that held “black” slaves. No man is a “negro” or a “white” person
under God, for all men share in the equitable ability to stand in the Þgurative blood of christ.
Notice that this act (law) is directed towards legal “persons,” not men. What care might a private
man of God have when faithful to NatureÕs Law if some Þctional corporation wishes to call him as 




!505
a ÒpersonÓ in its foreign law? This positive accusation of identiÞcation cannot be proven upon such
a negative Existence unless one chooses such a sinful (synthetic) disposition and not so ßattering a
title. Otherwise, there are no signs of id-entity to cause legal (Þctional) proof of such sin (syn).

No Þction appears in Nature or before God. No Þction is ßoating around in space or swimming in
the oceans. No Þction breathes air or grows from the soil. No Þction has an actual sex. No Þction
can actually Create Life. And no Þctional person can destroy GodÕs Creation without a man
actually committing that action in that pre-tended legal persona. A person is but a tool, not a user.
Fictional persons cannot do anything without manÕs will behind them, any more than government
can harm men without other men acting as the Þctional executive agents (ofÞcers/persons) of
government in name and in false, ßattering title and the color-of-law Þctional authority attached to
that legal title only.

Cartoons must be animated by men so that they appear to be alive. But the act of a cartoon is only
ever the act of a man. This is not a religious concept as much as it is the obvious, self-evident reality
of the realm of GodÕs Creation called Nature as compared to all other things and concepts. No
charge of religious title or legal membership to a corporate church is necessary to comprehend this
tenet of the Law of what Nature is, was, and always shall be as the Supreme Permanence of Being.
A man will be judged by God (whatever that Truly means), in other words, based on all of his own
actions and speciÞcally despite any notion that in all his Life he completed those actions while
acting as and representing a legal persona with legal (ßattering) titles and false legal authority
under the false color of manÕs legal law. The soul, in other words, leaves all false personas behind,
coming face to face with its Maker under no artiÞce and certainly no persona, titles, or names
(nouns). No excuses.

The spirit may take no earthly things or considerations with it when it departs the vessel (body).
This means that appearing before a priest or other legal title within an organized (corporate)
church we call organized ÒreligionÓ is to appear in the form of the legal name only, pretending that
our persona may be forgiven by a man acting falsely under a ßattering (anointed) title bestowed by
man in GodÕs name only. But God respects no names or titles, including those who claim to be
ÒChristianÓ in legal name and persona only. Only manÕs actions will prove what he Truly is, and no
title or legal persona may change that fact. A man cannot ever be a ÒChristian,Ó for only a legal
person may make and prove such a legalistic claim of ßattering title, and no works are required by
the corporate, legal and religious bestower of that man-made title. The word legal is opposed to
God and Nature, and so is the mere legalistic title of ÒChristian.Ó This creates a paradox of split
personality.

Praying to God while in a false persona is like trying to touch water in an airtight rubber suit. The
person cannot connect with God and Nature, for the person is not of that Realm. These are
opposing realms, matter and anti-matter. A person is the anti-man. A man may never touch God in
the artiÞcial body of a personhood, thus he may never touch the soil (land). A person does not Exist
in Nature and so cannot commune with Nature. God respects no person or artiÞce, because artiÞce
(anything created by man in law or other art forms) is always a design against Nature. Thus the
same rule appliesÉ

The word ÒChristianÓ is a noun, a legal title bestowed upon man by legal Þction. As a false title, it
was created by the pagan Roman empire. A follower of christÕs parables and teachings would never
have the need to claim his christ-like beliefs in the positive legal name and title of a Þctional
persona, for that follower of christ would be walking the walk upon that narrow path revealed by
the spiritual knowledge of christ, not just speaking falsely the words without a Life Lived under
and by the Word. The noun (name) defeats the verb of action that would be man acting under
GodÕs Law, the Law of Nature, which would be to physically act (Live) under the teachings of
christ and always in Nature while never respecting persons or any other artiÞce in title and name
only. To accept such a legal title as “Christian,” which as we will see is actually against the
scriptural teachings, is to become merely a legal actor in persona while enjoying the beneÞts and 




!506
immunities from ignorance of God’s Law through legal title and license from man’s state of
government. Of course, we call the person (corporation) of the United States a “Christian Nation,”
an oxymoron that has nothing to do with the teachings of christ.

—=—

“But wilt thou know, O vain man, that FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS
DEAD? …For AS THE BODY WITHOUT THE SPIRIT IS DEAD, SO
FAITH WITHOUT WORKS IS DEAD ALSO.”
—James 2: 20 and 26, KJB

—=—


Thus we may comprehend the Biblical tenet that man may only have one master; God or mammon.
One cannot be a citizen to mammon (a government that values all things in name only and only
under the value of monetary consideration) and also be under God’s Law, which vehemently
opposes mammon and any valuation placed upon any part of Nature, including the price put upon
man’s capita or head in human capital management. Think about that the next time you place
money (mammon) into your local church collection plate. This paradoxical duality of man’s
fallacious attempt to continuously serve two masters, both the Real and the artiÞcial at the same
time, will be expounded upon greatly throughout this work.

Most importantly though, here we Þnd the very foundation of law and free will (choice), for man
may choose freely to ignore or disbelieve in this fabled fate. Whether “God’s judgement” is a true
future event or not is not nearly as important as understanding that perception and concept of Þnal
judgement as the foundation of Natural (God’s) Law, in which such moral, True religious sentiment
(Lifestyle) is required for under-standing that Law. The scriptures are a blueprint; an instruction
manual for man to respect Nature and all Its Life while visiting as mere tenants in Jehovah.

Inversely, the legal law is just an operators manual for commercial vessels (persons) of government
in opposition to God’s Nature. It is in fact that intricate complexity and impossible-to-decipher
confounding of the legal commercial law as compared to the simplicity of God’s Laws of Nature
that is perhaps the greatest testament to the power and design of each. Even this opposition of
cognition and practical application is a sure sign of why these laws cannot exist together and must
instead exist in a constant state of war with each other. For they must both seek to be master over
man’s mind and over Nature Itself. They cannot exist together without one continuously
attempting to destroy the other. Simplicity does not co-exist with utter difÞculty.

This is the ancient battle of Good vs. evil, Nature vs. artiÞce, of Heaven on earth vs. hell on earth, of
the Living vs. the dead, of God vs. satan (as all things acting as an opposing adversary of Jehovah).

VERSUS - Latin. Against. In the title of a cause, the name of the plaintiff is put Þrst, followed
by the word "versus," then the defendant's name. Thus, "Fletcher versus Peck,” or (is the same
as) “Fletcher against Peck.” Word is commonly abbreviated "vs." or “v." (Black4)

—=—

It is interesting to note when examining any court case in the legal realm that all considerations of
the case are upon some monetary (false) re-presentation of Reality. Be it the valuation of life, liberty,
property, or of the very artiÞcial, patented legal names and products or ideas of the plaintiff and
defendant, our time on this earth is almost exclusively being spent in pursuit of some form of
money (value). Our very names are only Þnancial instruments (persons) of (created by) govern-
ment, administrated in false persona according to their net worth and insurable future labor
potential (capitalism). All court cases must have a value. All crimes are Þnancial, legal or illegal.
This is the artiÞce. This is mammon.

!507
The whole system of man’s law, from the authority of kings and lesser magistrates (gods) to the
very oath taken to them by their subjects, is based on this religious faith, like it or not. For the oath
conÞrms the Þction and binds men under the artiÞcial law, and that oath is made upon the Bible -
even while that Bible declares that man should take no such oaths, yet allows man the choice to do
so by his very own free will.

Let’s be honest with ourselves here. Anyone that would take an oath to evil (legal Þction) by
placing his hand upon good (the symbol of God’s Nature and Law) deserves what he gets for his
ignorance of what is parabolically written within that Bible. It is the choice to act ignorantly of
these scriptural facts that destroys manÕs Nature, just as a man might sign the devilÕs contract with-
out reading it, thus binding his soul to that artiÞcial state of being (spiritual death). This Reality of
instigated power through a foundational oath is the pillar of governmentÕs false existence as a legal
incorporation, and shall be shown in triplicate throughout this work. For a man caused to act in
person (anotherÕs property) is to be instigated by evil intent; a principal inciting man to evil acts
through the agency of his legal names and titles or lack thereof, both of which are forbidden to be
respected by men of God in those scriptural teachingsÉ

INSTIGATE - verb transitive - [Latin instigo; in and stigo, inusit; Gr. to prick.] To incite; to set
on; to provoke; to urge; used chießy or wholly in an ill sense; as, TO INSTIGATE ONE TO
EVIL; TO INSTIGATE TO A CRIME. (Webs1828)

INSTIGATED - participle passive - Incited or PERSUADED, AS TO EVIL. (Webs1828)

INCITE - verb transitive - [Latin incito; in and cito, to call, to stir up.] 1. TO MOVE THE MIND
TO ACTION BY PERSUASION OR MOTIVES PRESENTED; to stir up; to rouse; to spur on.
Antiochus, when he incited Prussians to join in war, set before him the greatness of the
Romans. 2. To move to action by impulse or inßuence. No blown ambition does our arms
incite. 3. TO ANIMATE; to encourage. (Webs1828)

CITE - verb transitive - 1. To call upon ofÞcially, or authoritatively; TO SUMMON; to give

legal or ofÞcial notice, as to a defendant to appear in court, to answer or defend. 2. TO
ENJOIN; to direct; TO SUMMON; to order or urge. 3. To quote; TO NAME or repeat, as a
passage or the words of another, either from a book or from verbal communication; as, to cite
a passage from scripture, or to cite the very words a man utters. 4. TO CALL OR NAME, in
support, PROOF OR CONFIRMATION; as, to cite an authority to prove a point in law.
(Webs1828)

QUOTE - verb transitive - 1. To cite, as a passage from some author; TO NAME, repeat or
adduce a passage from an author or speaker, by way of authority or illustration; as, to quote a
passage from Homer; to quote the words of Peter, or a passage of Paul's writings; to quote
chapter and verse. 2. IN COMMERCE, TO NAME, as the PRICE of an article. 3. TO NOTE. -
noun - A note upon an author. Obsolete. (Webs1828)

NOTE - noun - [Latin to know.] 1. A MARK OR TOKEN; something by which a thing may
be known; a visible sign. They who appertain to the visible church have all the notes of
EXTERNAL PROFESSION. 2. A mark made in a book, indicating something worthy of a
particular noticeÉ 5. Notice; heedÉ 6. REPUTATION; consequence; distinction; as men of
note. Acts 16:1. 7. State of being observedÉ 13. A WRITTEN OR PRINTED PAPER
ACKNOWLEDGING A DEBT AND PROMISING PAYMENT; as a promissory note; a bank-
note; a note of hand; a negotiable noteÉ - verb transitive - 1. To observe; to notice with
particular care; to heed; to attend to. No more of that; I have noted it well. Their manners
noted and their states surveyÕd. 2. To set down in writing. Note it in a book. Isaiah 30:8. 3. TO
CHARGE, as with a crime; with of or for. They were both noted of incontinency. - verb
transitive - To butt; to push with the horns. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

!508
 OBLIGATION OF A CONTRACT - That which LAW IN FORCE WHEN CONTRACT IS
MADE OBLIGES PARTIES to do or not to do, and remedy and legal means to carry it into
effect. As used in the U.S. Constitution, article 1, 9-10, the term means THE BINDING AND
COERCIVE FORCE WHICH CONSTRAINS EVERY MAN TO PERFORM THE
AGREEMENTS HE HAS MADE; a force grounded in the ethical principle of FIDELITY TO
ONE'S PROMISES, but deriving its legal efÞcacy from its recognition BY POSITIVE LAW,
and SANCTIONED by the law's providing a remedy for the infraction of the duty or for the
enforcement of the correlative right. The "obligation of a contract" is its binding force
according to the standards of LAW IN EXISTENCE WHEN IT WAS MADE. The "obligation
of a contract" is THE DUTY OF PERFORMANCE. The term includes EVERYTHING within
the obligatory scope of the contract, and it INCLUDES THE MEANS OF ENFORCEMENT.
(Black4)

—=—

Let us be very clear on two points here. Firstly, that citizenship is a contractual relationship under
sanction by positive law. Secondly, that this implied contract of citizenship is conÞrmed by our use
of government property, by our acting and signing in the surname, number, title, and other
registered artiÞces of the state. Use of these legal things is an expression of consent to the implied
contract of that mutual relationship between principal and agent. Thus, an agent can only ever act
according to its principalÕs (employerÕs) will and under its law. The deÞnition of Òobligation of a
contractÓ does indeed apply to every man that claims any beneÞt from and under government
protection, for protection requires subjection to that which provides it.

To summon a man to court is to in-cite a man to appear in a false persona, to cause the contractual
enjoinment of his christian name (mind, body, and soul) with the state surname (legal Þction) in
that artiÞce of evil. This is a sin (syn) against man and God, for this is the respect and use of persons
(synthetics). The birth certiÞcate is of course printed on a bank note, as a charge of the crime of
bastardy, making one a son of government (of Òthe PeopleÓ) under the doctrine of parens patria, and
thus charged with indebtedness and performance; the mark of a man as beast.

In the end, the judgement of God blames only the man, not the Þctional persons, names, and titles
he pre-tended to be. Thinly veiled legal laws, licenses, and government protections are not re-
cognized in GodÕs Þnal judgement. Nor are the words or forgivenesses of false representatives of
God in black, ceremonial robes. A verdict of not guilty cast by a legal god has nothing to do with
innocence before Jehovah, for the only way that a judge can pass such a verdict upon man is if he is
pre-judged at birth to be guilty of acting in that false legal persona against Jehovah, what the Bible
says to be a sinner (in artiÞce). A judge can only judge the person of man, not man. A judge can
only judge its own kind. A judge only controls Þctions of law, and so only a man in surety to a
Þctional person of law can be judged by that Þctional person of law called a Òjudge.Ó The judge
only rules over and administrates its own property, for a judge is only an agent of the principal and
creator of persons and titles. A man must act on his conscious, not take predicated action because
the legal law allows him to subvert that conscious thought and will with the magisterial permission
of legal license from these false legal gods. Actions done while acting in this Þctional persona of
citizenship is literally no excuse before God, for Nature recognizes not any false persona or legal
law. There is no innocence among the spiritually dead under legal, civil authority. God’s Higher
Law cannot protect persons.


Think of it this wayÉ GodÕs judgement happens at death. Birth into the legal Þction is legally and
Naturally considered as a spiritual death, a doom or judgement of felony, or if you will an anarchy
to GodÕs Word (Law). Therefore, we are all suffering the ÒwrathÓ of GodÕs judgment every single
day of our pretended lives in this legal matrix. For we are doomed to live without the beneÞt of the
Natural Law, without GodÕs gift of Natural, unalienable rights, and without the protection of GodÕs
Law over that of all that is adversarial to it. Sounds like we all died and went to hell already, eh?

!509
Better look again, for the Bible is not about any next Life. Fictional, legal life (person-hood) is the
after-Life. The Bible is the Law for this Life. And legal personhood is a judgement (doom) carrying
the sanction of limited franchise (freedom) in debtor’s hell. Parabolically we have already each
fulÞlled the scriptural warnings. We have already died and gone to that Þgurative Hades the
Natural Law protects us from. The literalist will never escape. The “Christian” already believes he
has escaped as he bows and prays through his invisible shackles in idolatry to the state. The atheist
is at least honest as he expresses his lack of knowledge about such things, still bound up by his
existential doubt. And of course the nihilist is already dead or might as well be in every way.

Yet, as silly as it sounds, christ (the Word of God) is always there to pull every single man out of
that legal matrix, even the most nihilistically ardent anarchist. For the foundational Law of Nature
simply does not allow the legal word magic and trickery to affect our Life in Reality.

To be clear, a judge only judges those already pre-judged. Thus, when man assumes the legal form
of a public person he is already doomed even before his appearance. The word doom means to be
judged. Thus when we appear in court we are appearing as that which is already doomed (pre-
judged). And so the mystery here is that these judges are only administering that which was al-
ready judged at birth. There are no actual “judges” in administrative courts, for in persona we are
all pre-judged, doomed to a spiritual death in civil life under the strict written law (lex scripta). And
so just as the devil might Þguratively manage and administrate all of his already judged and
doomed fallen souls in hell after GodÕs Þnal judgement, these administrative courts do the same to
our doomed strawmen. There is no innocence while acting in the doomed form and persona of a
public citizenship in debtor’s hell. And this author cannot stress enough here that we are living in
our own consented-to hell, a debtor’s prison in a performance contract of personhood. If the reader
cannot parabolically accept this metaphor despite the entirety of the legal system being as only a
Þctional story we respect and play along with, then perhaps another book that is adversaria with
this self-evident Truth should be turned to at your local goyim bookstore or supermarket.

You might say that ignorance of GodÕs Law is no excuse in that Þnal judgement, just as the
pollution of our rivers and lakes brings the judgement (doom) of cancers and other ills as
punishment for our own actions, despite any persona, incorporation, employment, or ßattering
titles we pretend to conduct ourselves in. God simply delivers the perfection of clean, Living water
through a cyclical, Natural distillation process as part of the wondrous design of Nature called rain
and snow. What we mix into that abundant and Living reservoir carries with it its own punishment
for harming what is the perfection of GodÕs Design through our own instigation Ñ a perfect
example of the simplistic and reasonable duty of man to God under the Natural Law. For Jehovah
is the Pure Water. If man acts against Jehovah, he only acts against the Oneness of himself and
harms others. He defecates in his own house. This is to say that if those downstream may be
effected by our actions, this is then a crime against the Natural Law. And “downstream” is a
metaphor meaning anything that may harm man and Nature in any way. The harming of Nature is
always either a purposeful or inadvertent harming of all who thrive within Its Permanence of
Being. Thus legality, as legal permission to act against Nature, is in fact totally unreasonable and
illogical… That is, unless one’s intent is evil (live backwards) and against the Natural Order and
Design of God.

A Þctional person can only ever be a creation of another legal entity, never a creation of God. It can
never be found nor recognized in Nature, though it can be artiÞcially named and called by this
legal terminology as being falsely a “natural” thing. Legal things (words) have nothing to do with
the actuality of Nature or God, or for that matter anything in Reality. The word ÒnaturalÓ thus takes
upon its opposite, adversarial meaning in the legal realm, which is that of a thing detached from its
Source in Nature, as that which is without Nature, just as a private man or even a private citizen of
one of the several (private) States is without or foreign to the jurisdiction of the United States or
other nation. This difference between Reality and Þction must be fully comprehended, so we do not
any longer allow these words to be consensually imprinted upon us as tricks are taught to
domesticated pets.

!510
To get a clear comprehension of how a man acting in the incorporation and agency of legal persona
necessarily and by law chooses government as his religion over that of God’s Law in scriptural
teachings, we must understand what it means to have True “Religious Freedom” as a reserved
Natural Right as opposed to its adversarial legalese word-magic of positive law terms of art
licensing generally the legal right of “freedom of religion.” Just a simple rearrangement of words
and the whole meaning changes. Here we Þnd the substance of Religious Freedom juxtaposed to its
adversarial legal form of freedom of religion as a purely legal concept of the franchise of public
servitude. This positive law recreation of a negative law absolute is reworded and redeÞned as
legal (anti-God) law in the United States district speciÞcally for public performance debtors, as the
legal right and obligations of voluntarily enslaved “citizen-ships” (vessels in prostitution to the
gods of the nation), which are the subjects of government and its false gods. And these false gods
will allow no other gods before themselves, for their law is opposed to the Law of God’s Nature.
The choice is clear, Reality with self-control as self-governance under the Natural Law or Þction
with military rule and forced governance under the artiÞcial law of gods of mammon.

This is one of the most important lessons in this work. Please ensure full comprehension between
these two very different “freedoms” before you proceed with this work. For as a citizenship of the
United States, the attachment to your strawman as property under the law of persons only allows
you to fall under the “freedom of religion” as a limited legal outlet of commercial franchise. In
other words, “Religious Freedom” is against the law of the United States for its subjects (persons).

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM - Within CONSTITUTION embraces not only the RIGHT to

worship God ACCORDING TO THE DICTATES OF ONE'S CONSCIENCE, BUT ALSO
THE RIGHT TO DO, OR FORBEAR TO DO, ANY ACT, FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE, the
doing or forbearing of which is not inimical to the peace, good order, and morals of society.
(Black4)

FREEDOM OF RELIGION - Embraces the CONCEPT of freedom to believe and freedom to

act, the Þrst of which (belief) is ABSOLUTE, but the second of which (action) REMAINS
SUBJECT TO REGULATION FOR PROTECTION OF SOCIETY. (Black4)

—=—

Now you tell me, what good is religious, moral belief if you are not allowed to act on it? To be clear,
this state of confusion at bar is the very purpose of nations, to prevent self-governing, moral
standing in men. For no moral man would allow a nation as this to continue in its abhorrent actions
against God (Nature) and man. But the moral man is cowed and paciÞed by his surety to the law of
his persona. We are so smitten and proud of our nationality, our personality in public that we don’t
dare risk doing what is right in and under the Law of God. This is unmistakably and self-evidently
the work of the devil (the attorney class) and his scribes.

These are completely separate deÞnitions, on separate pages of the dictionary. They are not the
same thing. As citizenships of the United States, you better damn well know the difference before
proceeding herein, and before you try and act morally in a society that strictly forbids moral actions
without license from the state.

Freedom of moral thought, but not freedom to act upon that conscious moral thought… This is
what public, legal freedom (franchise) is when deÞned by the commercial gods Ñ a legal corp-
oration called government. It is not freedom of religion, but franchise of religion. These are as the
rules set for employees (agents) by their employer (principal). This is not Natural freedom under
God, which is described above as Religious Freedom. This is tyranny named (noun) as “freedom,”
where the ability to practice religion is confounded and limited to the franchise it belongs to (of), as
freedom (franchise) of (belonging to) religion (memberships to legal corporations, as the legal,
anti-God deÞnition of religion). In the United States, the lack of a moral standing in God’s Law
(religious, spiritual Life) is the ofÞcial state religion, as an enforced, amoral lack of It. Freedom is
only a franchise allowed to Þctional persons. Governments cannot control in totality your thought

!511
processes, only your actions (anti-pro-verb) while in its property. SpeciÞcally, we must recognize
absolutely that the purpose of the legal law is to prevent man from acting upon his moral thoughts
and beliefs.

—=—

“No one is punished for his thoughts.”

—COGITATIONIS PAENAM NEMO PATITUR. Dig. 48, 19,18. (Black4)

—=—

“It’s impossible to have religious freedom IN ANY NATION WHERE

CHURCHES ARE LICENSED TO THE GOVERNMENT.”
—Congressman George Hansen, quoted from “In Caesar’s Grip,” by Peter Kershaw

—=—

“The framers of our Constitution meant we were to have freedom OF

religion, not freedom FROM religion.”
—Billy Graham

—=—

The legal realm acknowledges only written and spoken words. It is immune, so to speak, from
religious and moral (unwritten) controls, as legalism and religious action are foreign to each other.
Man is only punished for his actions, and when his actions are in the person of another, he is not
acting according to his own moral thoughts of Law.

By providing the Þctional, legally ÒnaturalÓ person (strawman) with an insurance bond for a manÕs
operation in that Þctional, commercial realm, government ensures that each individual man will act
collectively according to civil law and not according to his own religious and moral thoughts. This
is the separation of mind from the body, the killing of the spirit (soul). For the law is attached to the
person, and thus the man in the Þctional chains of surety to that person is bound by the public law
of persons. By acceptation of that person as a commercial vessel (a citizen-ship) in surety, man
tacitly agrees and consents (through assent) to abide by the legal law in direct opposition to GodÕs
Law while acting in that Þctional persona. He literally agrees to use his Real body as insurance to
ensure that he will operate in Þction (evil) according to strictly written law, and if he does not, the
man in surety will be judged and punished for the incorrect use of that corporate strawman
(property of government). Thus the manÕs moral mind does not control his Self (his body), for the
law of persons controls his mind and therefore his actions, where the legal persona acts as the
surrogate or second self. This is a lack of True Self-respect.

—=—

“No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his
goods, except he will Þrst BIND the strong man; and then he will spoil
his house.”
—Mark 3: 27, KJB

—=—

!512
 —=—

“Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his
goods, except he Þrst BIND the strong man? and then he will spoil his
house.”
—Matthew 12: 29, KJB

—=—

“My son, if thou be SURETY for thy friend, if thou hast stricken thy
hand with a stranger, THOU ART SNARED WITH THE WORDS OF
THY MOUTH, thou art taken with the words of thy mouth.”

“Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: Which
having no guide, overseer, or ruler, Provideth her meat in the summer,
and gathereth her food in the harvest.”
—Proverbs 6: 1-2 and 6-8, KJB

—=—

This is the purpose and pretext of legal surety: insurance that the instigation of person-hood at
birth into the nation will incite man’s actions to be in concordance with the legal law as opposed to
being in respect of God’s Law and Nature. Incitement to evil acts without moral compass
(direction). This is a binding relationship to Þctional rulers under contractual terms (word magic),
even by the shaking (striking) of hands. For a man’s feet never touch land while he sails his ship
upon the virtual sea of that surety (security) of legal commercial Þction. The legal jurisdiction is an
invisible, Þctional barrier set upon Creation and its Law; a prophylactic barring man from his very
own essence as part of that Oneness of Nature.

A Þctional person simply cannot follow GodÕs Law, without exception, for a person is not a
Creation of God. God bestows no status upon man but self-evidence. This untouchable essence of
negativity towards any of man’s systems of positive law can never be taken away, though
obviously we have been fooled into contractually selling those God-given attributes in exchange
for Þctional non-sense. A man acting in person is subject only to manÕs utilitarian legal law of
persons (status/condition), with strict prohibitions against God that we call as the doctrine of
“freedom of religion.” Opposites attract. A man in public personhood does not need and is not
expected to think in any way that is responsible or compos mentis, for the person is allowed only to
follow man’s (its master’s) strict legal law when used by its autonomic user.

—=—

“This word 'person' and its scope and bearing in the law, involving, as it
does, LEGAL FICTIONS and also apparently [IN APPEARANCE
ONLY] natural beings, it is difÞcult to understand; but it is absolutely
necessary to grasp, at whatever cost, a true and proper understanding to
the word IN ALL THE PHASES OF ITS PROPER USE. A person is here
not a physical or individual person, BUT THE STATUS OR

!513
 CONDITION WITH WHICH HE IS INVESTED. Not an individual or
physical person, but the STATUS, CONDITION OR CHARACTER
BORNE (carried) by physical persons.”

“THE LAW OF PERSONS IS THE LAW OF STATUS OR CONDITION.”

—American Law and Procedure, Vol. 13, page 137, 1910

—=—

The legal law can only consider artiÞcial things, for legal things are Þctions created by that law and
can only exist legally by license in that Þctional realm and jurisdiction. And so when the word
ÒpersonÓ is used in any legal setting, we must remember that this can only be considered as a legal
person, which is merely a cartoon character in the form and appearance of man but never man
himself. The legal person is the legal entity to which all legal laws are applied. No legal law is ever
applied to a ÒphysicalÓ living man, for a man is not a legal creation. The creator can only control its
own creation, and must bind the strong man to that artiÞce so as to enter his house (temple). Thus
the contract is the binding chain of servitude between man and person. Fiction can only control
Þction. It is the possession and operation of a legal person as a commercial vessel by that real,
living man that binds the man in surety to the legal laws that in turn bind the legal person. These
are the invisible chains of voluntary servitude as instigated purely by these words and terms of
artiÞciality (art).

More and more as we peel back the layers of this Þctional onion, we realize that the legal realm is
the Þgurative realm of satan. It is a place made only of words and lines on a map (a districted juris-
diction) that is completely, in every way possible, adversarial (satanic) to GodÕs Law and Nature.
We do not have to be religious fanatics to see hell for what it Truly is: a place for those contracted
with the devils (agents/attorneys) of the legal system. It is a place for legally dis-eased souls. And
it is exactly as the Bible describes, for even like the metaphor of water as being the commercial
jurisdiction, Þre is also a metaphoric term for hell. The christian name is combustible when
attached to a surname, and the legal name thereof is enßamed when any ßattering title of
employment is thereby attached. And this is why we are ÒÞredÓ (made extinct) from our
employments in mammon.

FIRE - noun - [The radical sense of Þre is usually, to rush, to rage, TO BE VIOLENTLY
AGITATED; and if this is the sense of Þre it coincides with Latin furo. It may be from
SHINING or CONSUMING.] 1. Heat and light emanating visibly, perceptibly and
simultaneously from any body; caloric; the unknown cause of the sensation of heat and of the
retrocession of the homogeneous particles of bodies from one another, producing expansion,
and thus enlarging all their dimensions; one of the causes of magnetism, as evinced by Dr.
Hare's calorimotor. In the popular acceptation of the word, Þre is the effect of combustion.
The combustible body ignited or heated to redness we call Þre; and when ascending in a
stream or body, we call it ßame. A piece of charcoal in combustion, is of a red color and very
hot. In this state it is said to be on Þre or to contain Þre. When combustion ceases, IT LOSES
ITS REDNESS and extreme heat, and we say, THE FIRE IS EXTINCTÉ 4. Light; luster;
splendor. Stars, hide your Þres! 5. Torture by burning. 6. THE INSTRUMENT OF
PUNISHMENT; or THE PUNISHMENT OF THE IMPENITENT IN ANOTHER STATE.
Who among us shall DWELL with the devouring Þre? Isaiah 33:11. 7. That which inßames or
irritates the passions. What Þre is in my ears? 8. Ardor of temper; violence of passion. He had
Þre in his temper. 9. LIVELINESS OF IMAGINATION; VIGOR OF FANCY;
INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITY; ANIMATION; FORCE OF SENTIMENT OR EXPRESSION.
And warm the critic with a poet's Þre. 10. The passion of love; ardent affection. The God of
love retires; dim are his torches, and extinct his Þres. 11. Ardor; heat; as the Þre of zeal or of
love. 12. Combustion; tumult; rage; contention. 13. Trouble; afßiction. WHEN THOU

!514
 WALKEST THROUGH THE FIRE THOU SHALT NOT BE BURNT. Isaiah 43:2. To set on Þre
to kindle; to inßame; to excite violent action. St. Anthony's Þre a disease marked by an
eruption on the skin, or a diffused inßammation, with fever; the Erysipelas. Wild Þre, an
ARTIFICIAL OR FACTITIOUS FIRE WHICH BURNS EVEN UNDER WATER. It is made by
a composition of sulphur, naphtha, pitch, gum and bitumen. It is called also Greek Þre. - verb
transitive - 1. To set on Þre; to kindle; as, to Þre a house or chimney; to Þre a pile. 2. To inßame;
to irritate the passions; as, to Þre with anger or revenge. 3. TO ANIMATE; TO GIVE LIFE
OR SPIRIT; as, to Þre the genius. 4. To drive by Þre [Little used.] 5. To cause to explode; to
discharge; as, to Þre a musket or cannon. 6. To cauterize; a term in farriery. - verb intransitive - 1.
To take Þre; to be kindled. 2. To be irritated or inßamed with passion. 3. To discharge
artillery or Þrearms. They Þred on the town. (Webs1828)

—=—

Care to rethink your perceptions of just what are the metaphoric Þres of hell? For even as you are
reading this work hellÕs ßames are kindling (animating, provoking, rousing, driving) you to return
to the commerce of mammon and its ÒgrocersÓ in this legal hell (artiÞce) run by the king (gods) of
lies. Need I say again here that this is not religion, but indeed the Real story of your artiÞcial
personÕs Þctitious life?

While researching, do not be confused by such confounding notions as put forth by the following
deÞnition of Òperson,Ó for a human being is also not the same as a man of God, as we will see. A legal
person can again only be applied to a man (GodÕs Creation) via his consensual agreement (choice)
as an artful contract in bond and surety. The term person can only be utilized as the Latin origin
denotes, as a Þctional character that a man may act through in surety, as if donning a suit of armor
displaying the heraldry and coat of Arms of his family, People (State), or Nation (father as a body
corporate) before battle. It is always a term of Þction. Notice how the word ÒmanÓ is avoided like
the plague in the deÞnition below, and used only as a legal term of reference purely to differentiate
Living man in the masculine from the other feminine sex, or from inanimate (non-Living) things
and as a singular (individual) artiÞcial being that is not in a plural form. A Þctional person has no
purpose and can participate in no action without a Living man inhabiting it and acting on its behalf
(breathing the Þre of artiÞcial life into it). Legal things (nouns) see only other legal things (nouns).
ÒPersonalÓ property is the subjective property of the public person, not the man. It is property in
name only with no substance actually attached to the Þction.

A cow, for instance, cannot be considered as a Òperson,Ó as the cow is not capable of rational
thought and cannot be made to consent through words or signature. The cow has no legal capacity
to under-stand law and speaks not the legal or common, general language, therefore the cow can-
not be considered as a legal person. A cow is non compos mentis. Only otherwise reasonable men can
be fooled by word-magic and trickery to act in legal form and give consent to such artiÞce. While
man can be purchased by the illusions of word magic, all other aspects of Nature under God must
be conquered (purchased) and taken by force, for only man has the capacity of free will that allows
him to choose to abandon his God (Nature) voluntarily through legal trickery.

To be clear, and as we will discuss later in detail, a human being is not a man of God. However, a
human being can legally be a ÒmanÓ in legal consideration, as intended with the meaning of subject
and/or slave, an animal, a state of being without soul.

We must remember that in the legal (Þctional) realm, a person may only be something artiÞcial. We
cannot mix up its literal usage with its Þgurative, artiÞcial construct deÞned as a similar (but not
the same) Òlegal person,Ó even when the word ÒnaturalÓ is used to describe it. Natural has many
deÞnitions, both Real and Þctional, and we must always be conscious of just what the nature
(source) of everything we come into contact with and use, as who or what it proprietarily (as
property) belongs to. Men of God cannot be property. Only the legally (Þctionally) created statuses
of men, as personas/slaves. For men of God, as those Living purposefully under GodÕs Law of
Nature, have no person (property). In the end, knowledge and reason (mind) is the key, when

!515
words may no longer trick and entrap us into such false conceptualizations. The body and the soul
of that body instill the substance and Þre of Life force (Existence), and yet Life alone is not
contingent or dependent upon awareness or knowledge, even of Its own self-Existence. Spiritual
Life and self-governance requires this trinity of mind, body, and soul in all things. Thus we may
also use the word person to describe and impute a man without consideration of spirituality,
referring only to his very ÒfactÓ of spacial existence alone, but not to any speciÞc, proprietary status.
When a man is robbed, we say that things were robbed from his person. In other words, the man
him or her Self was not stolen, only the objects that were on the man (but are not actually a part of
the man, like a Þnger). But in legal parlance, we must understand that the legal person is a separate
entity created (birthed) into a nation (district) and that it is separate from him in every way. It is not
his own (Þrst) person, it is anotherÕs. It is a vessel of commerce, like a member-ship to any club.
While a man always retained his own (Þrst) person, what is attached to him legally can be taken
away at any time, for it was never his own. It is not an actual part of man. In other words, a citizen-
ship (person) carries a sort of lien, as in a mort-gage against a home, where the man carrying that
burden of person-hood is not in the Þrst lien position, meaning that it may either be repossessed by
its proprietary creator or that the man fulÞlls his performance, docks the person (ship), and quits
claiming it as his rented vessel in tenancy, also known as rendering back to Caesar (the district)
what is CaesarÕs. At this point, only his literal (not legal) Þrst person is thus considered, which is
property of no man, only of God.

Remember before reading this, that all persons are re-present men as Þctional characters, but not all
men re-present persons. Some wear the mask and some do not. A man of God, as a follower of
christ, has no need of such a mask (persona).

PERSON - noun - [Latin persona; said to be compounded of PER, THROUGH or by, and
sonus, SOUND; a Latin word signifying primarily A MASK USED BY ACTORS ON THE
STATE.] 1. An individual HUMAN BEING consisting of body and soul. We apply the word
to living beings only, POSSESSED OF A RATIONAL NATURE; THE BODY WHEN DEAD
IS NOT CALLED A PERSON. It is applied alike to a man, woman or child. A person is a
thinking intelligent BEING. 2. A man, woman or child, CONSIDERED AS OPPOSED TO
THINGS, OR DISTINCT FROM THEM. A zeal for persons is far more easy to be perverted,
than a zeal for things. 3. A HUMAN BEING, considered with respect to THE LIVING BODY
OR CORPOREAL EXISTENCE ONLY. The FORM of her person is elegant. You'll Þnd her
person difÞcult to gain. The rebels maintained the Þght for a small time, and for their persons
showed no want of courage. 4. A human being, INDEFINITELY; one; a man. Let a person's
attainments be never so great, he should remember he is frail and imperfect. 5. A human being
REPRESENTED in dialogue, FICTION, or on the state; CHARACTER. A player APPEARS
IN THE PERSON of king Lear… 6. Character of ofÞce. HOW DIFFERENT IS THE SAME
MAN FROM HIMSELF, AS HE SUSTAINS THE PERSON OF A MAGISTRATE AND
THAT OF A FRIEND. 7. In grammar, the nominative (name) to a verb; THE AGENT THAT
PERFORMS OR THE PATIENT THAT SUFFERS ANY THING AFFIRMED BY A VERB; as,
I write; he is smitten; she is beloved; the rain descends in torrents. I, thou or you, he, she or it,
are called the Þrst, second and third persons. Hence WE APPLY THE WORD PERSON TO
THE TERMINATION OR MODIFIED FORM OF THE VERB used in CONNECTION with
the PERSONS; AS THE FIRST OR THE THIRD PERSON OF THE VERB; the verb is in the
second person. 8. IN LAW, an artiÞcial person is a corporation or body politic. In person by
one's SELF; with bodily presence; not be representative. The king in person visits all around.
- verb transitive - TO REPRESENT AS A PERSON; TO MAKE TO RESEMBLE; TO IMAGE…
(Webs1828)

INDEFINITELY - adverb - Without any SETTLED limitation; as space indeÞnitely extended.

1. Not precisely; not with certainty or precision; as, to use a word indeÞnitely. (Webs1828)

PERSONALLY - adverb - IN PERSON; BY BODILY PRESENCE; NOT BY

REPRESENTATIVE OR SUBSTITUTE; as, TO BE PERSONALLY PRESENT; to deliver a
letter personally. They personally declared their assent to the measure. 1. With respect to an

!516
 individual; particularly. She bore a mortal hatred to the house of Lancaster, and personally to
the king. 2. With regard to NUMERICAL EXISTENCE. The converted man is personally the
same he was before. (Webs1828)

PERSONABLE - Having the CAPACITIES OF A PERSON; for example, the defendant was
judged personable to maintain this action. This word is obsolete. (Bouv1856)

PERSONAL - BELONGING TO THE PERSON. 2. This adjective is frequently employed in

connection with substantives, things, goods, chattels, actions, RIGHTS, duties, and the like as
personal estate, put in opposition to real estate; personal actions, in contradistinction to real
actions; personal rights are THOSE WHICH BELONG TO THE PERSON; personal duties
are those which are TO BE PERFORMED IN PERSON. (Bouv1856)

PERSON - This word is applied to men, women and children, WHO ARE CALLED
NATURAL PERSONS. In law, man and person ARE NOT EXACTLY SYNONYMOUS
TERMS. Any human being is a man, whether he be a member of society or not, whatever
may be the rank he holds, or whatever may be his age, sex, etc. A PERSON IS A MAN
CONSIDERED ACCORDING TO THE RANK HE HOLDS IN SOCIETY, WITH ALL THE
RIGHTS TO WHICH THE PLACE HE HOLDS ENTITLES HIM, AND THE DUTIES
WHICH IT IMPOSES. It is also used to denote A CORPORATION WHICH IS AN
ARTIFICIAL PERSON. 3. But when the word "Persons" is spoken of in legislative acts, natural
persons will be intended, unless something appear in the context to show that it applies to
artiÞcial persons. 4. Natural persons are divided into males, or men; and females or women.
Men are capable of all kinds of engagements and functions, unless by reasons applying to
particular individuals. Women cannot be appointed to any public ofÞce, nor perform any civil
functions, except those which the law specially declares them capable of exercising. 5. They
are also sometimes divided into FREE PERSONS AND SLAVES. Freemen are those who
have preserved their natural liberty, that is to say, WHO HAVE THE RIGHT OF DOING
WHAT IS NOT FORBIDDEN BY THE LAW. A slave is one who is IN THE POWER OF A
MASTER TO WHOM HE BELONGS. SLAVES ARE SOMETIMES RANKED NOT WITH
PERSONS BUT THINGS. But sometimes they are considered as persons for example, a
NEGRO is in contemplation of law a person, so as to be capable of committing a riot in
conjunction with white men. Vide Man. 6. Persons are also divided into CITIZENS, AND
ALIENS, when viewed with regard to their political rights. When they are considered in
relation to their civil rights, THEY ARE LIVING OR CIVILLY DEAD; vide Civil Death;
outlaws; and infamous persons. 7. PERSONS ARE DIVIDED INTO LEGITIMATES AND
BASTARDS, when examined as to their RIGHTS BY BIRTH. 8. When viewed in their
domestic relations, they are divided into parents and children; husbands and wives;
guardians and wards; AND MASTERS AND SERVANTS SON, AS IT IS UNDERSTOOD
IN LAW… (Bouv1856)

STATUS - 1. A PERSON’S LEGAL CONDITION, WHETHER PERSONAL OR

PROPRIETARY; the sum total of a person’s legal rights, duties, liabilities, and other legal
relations, or any particular group of them separately considered <the status of a landowner>.
2. A person’s legal condition regarding personal rights but excluding proprietary relations
<the status of a father (or) wife>. 3. A person’s capacities and incapacitates, as opposed to
other elements of personal status <the status of minors>. 4. A personÕs legal condition insofar
as it is imposed by the law without the person’s consent, as opposed to the condition that
the person has acquired by agreement <the status of a slave>… (Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th
Edition)

—=—

It is of the utmost importance to comprehend here that all of these terms of art are not Natural to
man. We are not Created (born into Nature) with these legal, artiÞcial statuses, names, classes, and
ßattering titles. We are not born into Nature as men or women, nor as slaves or masters or as

!517
parents or as children. These are all merely the words (creation) of man, and so is the “person”
these legal attributes are legally attached to. The man chooses to play the part or he chooses instead
to follow God without such respect of artiÞce, status, and ßattering titles. He is either free to act in
God’s Word or he is bound in his actions by legal constraints, which outlaw conscious and moral
action.

Are you acting in Þrst or third person? Are you your own person (True Self) or are you acting in the
person (id-entity) of another? Please understand here that whatever God you actually serve is
dependent upon the answers to these questions, and that whatever law you choose to follow, be it
of Nature or of Þction, this and this alone answers the question of what God you actually follow.
For your actions will always speak louder than your empty words. Words are voiceless alone. One
cannot worship God with words, for words are not a Creation of God. These are the Realities we
must continuously scrutinize and Live by, for we are so easily misled.

When we vote, we do so personally. We give our consent to be ruled by our actions in personhood.
It is not us that votes, it is only the action of our person activated and thus personiÞed through our
own actions. The person is a graven image, a likeness of man but not man, a mask of artiÞciality
worn as if it hides man’s actions from his Maker and Source. While man is an indeÞnite Creation of
God, a person or Òhu-manÓ is deÞnite (existing only by manÕs deÞnition), and is at best a creation
under or a part belonging to man. Thus the term “personal property” is property belonging to the
rented person (legal status) of man, not to the man himself. Personal property is not private
property, but public. The person is a graven (dead) image. A mortgage is a graven (dead) pledge.
Citizenship is a conviction of legal doom representing a spiritual death in Life by legal personhood
(felony of birth).

—=—

“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of
any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that
is in the water under the earth…”
—Exodus 20:4, KJB

—=—

“PERSON: The term “person” may be construed to include the United

States, this state, or any state or territory, or any public or Private
Corporation, as well as an individual.”
ÑRevised Code of Washington, RCW 1.16.080, from its deÞnition of Ôperson’

—=—

A man in citizen-ship is absolutely incapable of obeying the Ten Commandments, for as his
foundation he lives falsely in and under a legal persona, abiding and dwelling only according to
that false (graven) image in legal (antichrist) standing against those ancient Laws in the Covenant
of God. A man acting in person has no right to act upon his moral (religious) belief, only upon the
law governing his legal person. A man acting in person has only the rights of that Þctional person,
has only the use of the property of that Þctional person, and performs all functions of government
and in society in and through that Þctional person; the graven image. Thus a manÕs ÒfreedomÓ of
religion is only what the state allows, for the man’s actions are controlled (dom) by the person of
government he acts within. This is voluntary slavery, as the doctrine of master and servant.

!518
 IMAGE - noun - [Latin imago.] 1. A REPRESENTATION OR SIMILITUDE of any person or
thing, FORMED of a material substance; as an image wrought out of stone, wood or wax.
Whose is this image and superscription? Matthew 22:20. 2. A statue. 3. AN IDOL; THE
REPRESENTATION OF ANY PERSON OR THING, that is an object of worship. The
second commandment forbids the worship of images. 4. The likeness of any thing on
canvas; a picture; a resemblance painted. 5. ANY COPY, REPRESENTATION OR
LIKENESS. The child is the image of its mother. 6. Semblance; SHOW; APPEARANCE. The
face of things a frightful image bears. 7. An idea; A REPRESENTATION OF ANY THING TO
THE MIND; a conception; a picture drawn by fancy. Can we conceive. Image of aught
delightful, soft or great? 8. In rhetoric, a lively description of any thing IN DISCOURSE,
which presents a kind of picture to the mind. 9. In optics, the FIGURE of any object, made
by rays of light proceeding from the several points of it. Thus A MIRROR REFLECTS THE
IMAGE OF A PERSON STANDING BEFORE IT, as does water in a vessel or stream, when
undisturbed. - verb transitive - To imagine; TO COPY BY THE IMAGINATION; TO FORM A
LIKENESS IN THE MIND BY THE FANCY OR RECOLLECTION. And image charms he
must behold no more. (Webs1828)

—=—

Notice again here that the verb (action of Being) is turned into a noun (Þctional name of a person).
The man in action is converted by legality into acting in the form of man called a person, and so the
man is only legally recognized by the legal status attached to the man through that Þctional person
in surety. This causes the man to act outside of his own conscious, speciÞcally according to the rules
of the Þctional state Ñ the creator (god) and ruler (principal government) of the Þctional person
controlled by the man (agent).

Again, in the legal realm of Þction, all substance in Reality must be remade, reconsidered in noun
(name) form, disregarding all substance and thus rebirthing all Creation into an artiÞcial, legal
matrix of words, considered then outside of Nature and thus without Natural Rights, where all is
simulated and imaginarily redesigned and reinvented into legally deÞned persons, places, or
things. For all these Realities of Nature must re-appear as something artiÞcial Ñ in name (noun) and
false image only. Now consider that every word is legally patented by that legal creator, so that
only their deÞnition applies to their art form of law. Words create an artiÞcial value system, a false
paradigm. Words are money. To increase value, one only need fake scarcity.

—=—

“Our entire system, in an economic sense, is based on restriction.

SCARCITY AND INEFFICIENCY ARE THE MOVERS OF MONEY; the
more there is of any resource the less you can charge for it. The more
PROBLEMS there are, the more OPPORTUNITIES there are to make
money. THIS REALITY IS A SOCIAL DISEASE, FOR PEOPLE CAN
ACTUALLY GAIN OFF THE MISERY OF OTHERS AND THE
DESTRUCTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT. EFFICIENCY,
ABUNDANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY ARE ENEMIES OF OUR
ECONOMIC STRUCTURE, FOR THEY ARE INVERSE TO THE
MECHANICS REQUIRED TO PERPETUATE CONSUMPTION.”
ÑPeter Joseph, author of ÔZeitgeistÕ series of documentary Þlms.

—=—

!519
We must consider closely the distinction of the word (adverb) personally as deÞned above, meaning
to show up in court or other legal jurisdiction and to act in oneÕs pretended public persona (noun)
as opposed to doing so by agent (attorney) or as a private (foreign) entity, and which we say as
being represented by another (by another agent). But this action still constitutes the making of an
appearance in the person (noun) and capacity of anotherÕs name and in surety to it, for we can only
ever legally appear in their art form acting within their Þctional name of government. We cannot
appear lawfully, for to appear and act in person is wholly against GodÕs Law. We are permitted,
licensed to appear in legal form by the masters of legal (artiÞcial) life, which the Bible refers
metaphorically to as the underworld, hell, the Hebrew sheol, the Greek hades, the lower regions, the
grave Ñ the gates of the courtroom bar being the simulation of the gates of hell, deÞned by Webster
as the power and policy of Satan and his instruments. If you can be summoned by your agency relation-
ship to such a place, a place of the dead, as such a legal (Þctional) court at bar, then you are certainly
not Free in GodÕs Realm of heaven on Earth.

We cannot be legally (artiÞcially) seen without identifying ourselves as or in the agency of that
proprietary legal (artiÞcial) person Þrst. By appearing in person we are showing the court that we
have consented to having a legal capacity to carry that summonable burden of Þction. As we will
discuss later in this work, in legality an adverb is actually just a noun in disguise. Thus the ÒactionÓ
of appearing personally (in adverb) only refers to the name of the action of legally appearing with-
out an agent (attorney) doing it for you, in order to re-present your strawman on the stateÕs behalf;
for you would still only ever be appearing in the legal court as a legal person (by name), as that is
all the Þctional court can administer over and govern under its patented law of persons. The judge
is like a cartoon character that can only exist in the cartoon and can only see other cartoons. How-
ever, the adverb is still a word of modiÞcation (naming), descriptive merely of the status and form
of an ÒactionÓ and not referential to its actual substance or occurrence in Nature. There can be no
real action (verb) in court, only the Þctional legal kind as a description of words on paper. A Þction
is not capable of an action in Nature (in Reality), for a Þction does not Exist in the realm of Reality
where verbs (actions) Exist and effect that Nature. The action (verb) of a Þctional person in court
can only ever be in name (noun) only. It is the appearance a man makes in the admixed name that
makes the person come to artiÞcially live (evil).

A numerical existenceÉ

Sounds a lot like The Matrix movie, does it not?

We live as a simulated ÒcharacterÓ inside the algorithm of a complex computer-like code of law Ñ a
legal life (falsely bound existence under contract) executed as purely a re-presentation of one's Self;
the personiÞcation of Self into a graven image. Projected self-image. In the movie, if those realistic
looking, digitalized ÒpeopleÓ within The Matrix simulation went to the Þctionally represented
version of a court, they too would appear personally (in person), in a digital form. But they werenÕt
really there, now were they, except in their own brainwashed minds? And neither was the court or
the judge. Belief in the Realness (the simulated impression of a similar form without substance),
jurisdiction (a simulated realm magically existing on top of Reality), and the authority of the
Þctional court and its agents in ßattering title makes the court seemingly real enough to the senses,
though they are purely creations of legalistic non-sense. And that self-projected persona was, as in
the legal Þction, merely a digitally created Þctional character (letters and numbers are both digits)
that is no more tangible in Real Life than a cartoon character. For the Þctional person is made up of
nothing but letters on paper. As long as one believes in the legal matrix of code that contemplates
and rules over their persona, they can be made to appear ÒbodilyÓ as if they really are that Þctional
person in name through the bond of surety Ñ just like in the movie; just like cartoons seem to come
to life due to manÕs animation (simulation) of them. And the most important cog in this Þction, the
one that holds the entire artiÞcial realm of legal law together as evil (anti-life) incarnate, is that man
believes (loves) himself wholeheartedly to be that artiÞcial Ònatural personÓ in his Real Life. True
Self-Love is part of the Natural Law. All Þctions destroy that Love of the Real, Natural Self and
taint the mind with ßattery and vain intention. That one cannot perceive the difference between

!520
these dualities of “existence” is the great legal bond that literally seals one’s fate in separation from
one’s connection with the Oneness of God’s Nature. It is said one must Love one’s Self before one
Love’s others.

—=—

“What is hell? I maintain that it is THE SUFFERING OF BEING

UNABLE TO LOVE.”
—Fyodor Dostoyevsky, from ‘The Brothers Karamazov,’ a serial in The Russian Messenger from January 1879 to November 1880.

—=—

But what is this Loveless life in hell?

Bouvier clears up any misconception that a Þctional person might be a Reality or actually Living in
Nature (Love) when he deÞnes the notion of how a manÕs Life, and distinctively a personÕs artiÞcial
life, comes to an end.

Here we can comprehend the very deÞnition of the living dead…

DEATH - In medical jurisprudence, criminal law, evidence. The cessation of life… 14. - 2. The
death of a man, as to its effects on others, may be considered with regard, 1. To his contracts.
2. Torts committed by or against him. 3. The disposition of his estate; and, 4. To the liability or
discharge of his BAIL… 20. Death is also divided into NATURAL AND CIVIL. 21. Natural
death is the cessation of life. 22. CIVIL DEATH IS THE STATE OF A PERSON WHO,
THOUGH POSSESSING NATURAL LIFE, HAS LOST ALL HIS CIVIL RIGHTS, AND, AS
TO THEM, IS CONSIDERED AS DEAD. A person convicted and ATTAINTED of felony,
and sentenced to the state prison for life, is, in the state of New York, in consequence of the act
of 29th of March, 1799, and by virtue of the conviction and sentence of imprisonment for
LIFE, to be considered as CIVILLY DEAD. (Bouv1856)

DEAD - Something which has no life; FIGURATIVELY, SOMETHING OF NO VALUE.

(Bouv1856)

ATTAINT - verb transitive - [See Attainder.] 1. To taint or corrupt; TO EXTINGUISH THE

PURE OR INHERITABLE BLOOD OF A PERSON found guilty of treason or felony, by
confession, battle, or verdict, and consequent sentence of death, or by special act of
Parliament… 3. To disgrace; to cloud with infamy; to stain. 4. TO TAINT OR CORRUPT. -
noun - 1. A stain, spot or taint. [See taint.] 2. ANY THING INJURIOUS; THAT WHICH
IMPAIRS… (Webs1828)

TAINT - A conviction of FELONY, OR THE PERSON SO CONVICTED. (Black4)

ATTAINDER - English criminal law. Attinctura, the stain or CORRUPTION OF BLOOD

which arises from being condemned for ANY crime… (Bouv1856)

ATTAIN - To reach or come to by progression or motion; to arrive at; as, to attain a ripe old
age. (Black4)

DER - PreÞxed to names of places, may be from Sax. deor, A WILD BEAST, or from dur,
WATER. (Webs1828)

—=—

!521
There is no consideration by government of Real Life for a man without blood, only the artiÞcial,
bloodless, civil life of a Þctional persona. In this respect, there are three stages of ÒlifeÓ as
considered by law:

1. Spiritual Life, which is civil death, an absence of legal capacity and legal personhood.
Virtual invisibility and immunity from civil law and the law of nations but only while under
GodÕs Law of Nature.


2. Civil life, which is spiritual death by attainder for felons (for being born as a burden on the
state/People) given personhood (freedom/franchise) in the open-prison of commercial,
debtorÕs hell (status as legal life within the United States jurisdiction).


3. Conviction with life sentence to incarceration, which is a lack of both of the above, as the
taking away of most or all rights and estate both Þctional and Natural. Banishment or
adjuration from the realm carries a similar notion of outlawry, though this action of
condemnation does not necessarily prove spiritual consideration as a religious man by the
state. Mere outlaws are not legally considered as religious men. A religious man removes
himself from the civil jurisdiction voluntarily and has choice to return, whereas an outlaw is
forcibly removed and permanently sanctioned from it. But the outlaw is still regenerable,
which is why monasteries offered sanctuary to the outlaw or wanted criminal, so that in a
strange way he chooses his own punishment (judgement), prison or monasterial works. He
can become a religious man without legal persona, for it is the Þction and not the man that is
banished.

Remember, this is not Reality, only the legal consideration (judgement) of manÕs strawman or lack
thereof. To be tainted is to be condemned; a state of felony in conviction of a legal life without blood
consideration. To attain the state of a man into a mere wild beast (hu-man animal) in consideration
of law is to be attainted of all natural or God-given (unalienable) rights and to be granted instead
with only legal rights (commercial franchise). These are the artiÞcial rights attached to a manÕs
person (status in the political society) that we have all become accustomed to from birth
(sentencing). And so we see that this state of man as a purely spiritual Existence, of untainted
blood, can only be attained through conviction and outlawry from the civil society (banishment), or
when a man becomes a spiritual ÒreligiousÓ man in his abjuration of the legal realm of men, for
spirituality is an illegal act in a legal setting. In other words, when man becomes self-governing
under GodÕs Law, he has no need for manÕs public civil law or public civil rights, no need for a
surname attached to his christian Þrst (Highest) name, and no more desire for license from the state
to act against his own Nature (Jehovah) and self-interest in and of all other Life and Creation. A
man with blood consideration is private, and therefore legally considered as above the law of the
publicity of the lower-class status of public persons.

But please do not mistake this as the authorÕs support of this false, legalistic sovereignty, for the
apparent sovereign is only the trickster, the petty joint-master of slaves in human capital
management. It is a requirement to rule over others to be considered as Òsovereign,Ó for otherwise
there is nothing to sovereign over. The legal, ecclesiastical, false sovereigns as idols of the nations
today are merely the ßattering titles of the granted ofÞces of various corporations, not Real men.
For no man is sovereign over another without the trickery of word magic or utterly violent
subjection in tyranny. This is an evil, unnatural state, for only Jehovah is manÕs True Sovereign. It is
to be a member of a dictatorship (sayer of the law). Sovereignty is not the goal of a man of God,
and is only a term of art used to describe that which is Highest in Authority and negative
protections from law (sanctions) within the legal setting only, as the lawmaker and enforcer of
others by agency. Sovereignty is a sanctuary for the Lawful man to Live under, not above. In
Nature it is always a Þctional title, for God respects no such artiÞce. It is not upon the path of christ
to become Sovereign (God), but to Þnd and Live under It as Law. To call a Naturally Free man
under God as ÒsovereignÓ is a worthless commentary, for his sovereignty is self-evident in
consideration of Law by his own actions. Man is Naturally an extension of Jehovah, but legally
just an abandoned soul ripe for plunder by the sea pirates of the nations. Those gurus who promote

!522
sovereignty while still carrying the public surname are at best misinformed and at worst dis-
information agents, public information mercenaries and hirelings with designs only to keep the
mysteries, and through that mystery the power of their constitutors, for only in secret may such
false authority exist. Without such mystery (the causal effect of public ignorance), no man would
allow himself to be enslaved.

A spiritual Life is in no way the same as a civil life (legally being under attainder), for man cannot
be both Living and dead. His blood cannot be at the same time Pure and tainted. It is important to
comprehend here that this legal state of corruption of blood is descriptive of exactly what United
States citizenship is, for a man in a public United States citizen-ship is only considered as a Þctional
person, and Þctional personÕs have no blood to consider. They are not Real. A man considered as
without blood (in a state of corruption against God and Nature) has no rights of inheritance, for his
strawmanÕs artiÞcial feet can never stand (have standing) on the land (actual soil) of Nature.

PEDIS POSSESSION - Possession of the foot; AN ACTUAL FOOTHOLD; ACTUAL

POSSESSION OF LAND. SINCE STANDING UPON LAND IS A NATURAL SYMBOL OF
POSSESSING IT, the phrase has come to mean ACTUAL POSSESSION of any particular
piece of land, as evidenced by occupancy, inclosure, etc. (WCA1889)

PEDIS POSITIO - Placing of the foot; A FOOTHOLD. (WCA1889)

—=—

A Þctional, legal person may only ever exist by pretending to walk upon and thus be protected by
the Þctional jurisdiction of the United States as its issue, wherever he may be. We are pedestrians
bound to the public law of the road. This is not possession, but more a legalized easement and
permitted trespass, sort of like cattle in the open range season. In short, we are birthed (borne/
carried) into certiÞed and registered attainder, for a legal entity can only ever be created without
blood — without Life. Blood only Exists in Nature, considered only under or from God. In other
words, Naturally ßowing blood is not a legal creation or design of man, and so it cannot be
patented as property. That is, unless it is ÒscientiÞcallyÓ altered into a novel (new/original)
synthetic creation by psychopaths. But the Source (GodÕs Creation) cannot be owned. The US
constitution, therefore, only exists for private citizens of the individual (several) private States
(People), which are speciÞcally not United States commercial citizen-ships. The hierarchy is
obvious, where private men in union created the constitution as its gods, whereas the constitution
later created government, and then that US government (through its own created agencies and
agents) created US citizens (public persons).

—=—

“The stronger is the condition of the party in possession.”

—Potior est conditio possidentis. Maxim of law. (WCA1889)

—=—

Private men retain their ÒNaturalÓ and reserved rights, for the United States jurisdiction may only
consider a private citizen according to his stronger condition of untainted blood and heirship, for it
has no jurisdiction over the man unless he is sentenced (noted) to death as a surety to a
commercially dead United States person at birth or naturalization. His blood must be (Þguratively)
tainted.

A cartoon in a cartoon world…

!523
 —=—

“It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States,
and a Citizenship of a State, WHICH ARE DISTINCT FROM EACH
OTHER, AND WHICH DEPEND UPON DIFFERENT
CHARACTERISTICS OR CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE
INDIVIDUAL…”
—Slaughter House Cases, supra, at 408

—=—

Notice that the word death by attainder has nothing to do with actual death of the physical body,
only the civil death of legal rights and considerations, or what is called as legal “status.” The birth
process is in fact a registered event of the conviction of man under sin. It is the creation of a legal
entity, which culturally becomes the man’s mistaken public id-entity.

ATTAINDER - That EXTINCTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND CAPACITIES which takes

place whenever a person who has committed treason or felony receives sentence of DEATH
for his crime. The effect of "attainder" upon such felon is, in general terms, that ail his estate,
real and personal, is forfeited. It differs from conviction, in that IT IS AFTER JUDGMENT,
whereas conviction is upon the verdict of guilty, but before judgment pronounced, and may be
quashed upon some point of law reserved, or judgment may be arrested. The consequences of
attainder are FORFEITURE OF PROPERTY AND CORRUPTION OF BLOOD. At the
common law, attainder resulted in three ways, viz.: by confession, by verdict, and by process
or outlawry. The Þrst case was where the prisoner pleaded guilty at the bar, or having ßed to
sanctuary, confessed his guilt and ABJURED THE REALM to save his life. The second was
where the prisoner pleaded not guilty at the bar, and the jury brought in a verdict against him.
The third, when the PERSON accused made his escape and was OUTLAWED in England, by
statute 33 & 34 Vict. c. 23, attainder upon conviction, with consequent corruption of blood,
forfeiture, or escheat is abolished. In the United States, the doctrine of attainder is now scarcely
known, although during and shortly after the Revolution acts of attainder were passed by
several of the states. The passage of such bills is expressly forbidden by the constitution.
(Black4)

CONDEMNATION - In admiralty law. The judgment or sentence of a court having juris-

diction and acting in rem, by which (1) it is declared that A VESSEL WHICH HAS BEEN
CAPTURED AT SEA AS A PRIZE WAS LAWFULLY SO SEIZED AND IS LIABLE TO BE
TREATED AS PRIZE; or (2) that property which has been seized for an alleged violation of
the revenue laws, neutrality laws, navigation laws, etc., was lawfully so seized, and is, for
such cause, forfeited to the government; or (3) that the vessel which is the subject of inquiry
is unÞt and unsafe for navigation. In the civil law. A SENTENCE OR JUDGMENT WHICH
CONDEMNS SOME ONE TO DO, TO GIVE, OR TO PAY SOMETHING, or which declares
that his claim or pretensions are unfounded. In real property law. The process by which
PROPERTY OF A PRIVATE OWNER IS TAKEN FOR PUBLIC USE, without his consent,
but upon the award and payment of just compensation, being in the nature of A FORCED
SALE AND CONDEMNER STANDS TOWARD OWNER AS BUYER TOWARD SELLER. A
"condemnation proceeding" is a special proceeding at law to determine in a single action the
damages done by the taking, BUT IT IS NOT A CIVIL ACTION, OR A CIVIL PROCESS
within the meaning of the statutes relating to civil process. THE LAW AUTHORIZING IT
MUST BE STRICTLY CONSTRUED, AND EVERY CONDITION AND REQUIREMENT
MUST BE SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. (Black4)

!524
 CONDEMNED - participle passive - Censures; pronounced to be wrong, GUILTY, worthless
or FORFEITED; ADJUDGED OR SENTENCED TO PUNISHMENT. (Black4)

APPROBATION - noun - [Latin approbatio. See Proof and Prove.] 1. The act of approving; a
liking; that state or DISPOSITION OF THE MIND, IN WHICH WE ASSENT TO THE
PROPRIETY OF A THING, with some degree of pleasure or satisfaction; as, THE LAWS OF
GOD REQUIRE OUR APPROBATION. 2. Attestation; support; that is, active approbation or
action in favor of what is approved. 3. The commendation of a book licensed or permitted to
be published by authority, as was formerly the case in England. (Webs1828)

DISAPPROBATION - noun [dis and approbation.] A disapproving; dislike; THE ACT OF

THE MIND which condemns what is supposed to be wrong, WHETHER THE ACT IS
EXPRESSED OR NOT. WE OFTEN DISAPPROVE, WHEN WE DO NOT EXPRESS
DISAPPROBATION. (Webs1828)

CENSURE - noun - 1. The act of blaming or Þnding fault and condemning as wrong;
applicable to the moral conduct, or to the works of men. When applied to PERSONS, it is
nearly equivalent to blame, reproof, reprehension, reprimand. It is an expression of
disapprobation, which often implies reproof. 2. JUDICIAL SENTENCE; JUDGMENT THAT
CONDEMNS. An ecclesiastical censure is a sentence of condemnation, or penalty inßicted on
a member of a church for mal-conduct, by which he is deprived of the communion of the
church, or prohibited from executing the sacerdotal ofÞce. - verb transitive - 1. To Þnd fault
with and condemn as wrong; to blame; to express disapprobation of; as, to censure a man, or
his manners, or his writings. We laugh at vanity, oftener than we censure pride. 2. To condemn
by a judicial sentence, as in ecclesiastical affairs. 3. TO ESTIMATE. - verb intransitive - TO
JUDGE. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is difÞcult to accept that most of us have been condemned (sentenced to ad-diction) by being ad-
judged (doomed) at birth to be bound under commercial vessels of the United States or other
nations under admiralty law, and that this act of mammon is merely an estimation and insured
wager of our future labor potential as human capital live-stock. But as will be revealed within this
work, a man borne into United States citizenship is in-deed Òa vessel which has been captured at sea as
a prize (piracy), and is thus considered lawfully to be so seized and is liable to be treated as prize,” according
to this legal birth man-ifest.

VESSEL - noun - [Latin vas, vasis. This word is probably the English vat.]… 5. Something
containing. VESSELS OF WRATH, in Scripture, are such PERSONS as are to receive the full
effects of God's wrath and indignation, as a punishment for their sins. Vessels of mercy, are
persons who are to receive the effects of God's mercy, or future happiness and glory.
Chosen vessels, ministers of the gospel, as appointed to bear the glad news of salvation to
others; called also earthen vessels, on account of their weakness and frailty. - verb transitive -
TO PUT INTO A VESSEL. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

PUBLIC VESSEL - One owned and USED BY A NATION OR GOVERNMENT FOR ITS
PUBLIC SERVICE, whether in its navy, its revenue service, or otherwise. (Black4)

—=—

It is important to note that when Webster states that a word is [not in use], this is to say that in the
year 1828 the word was not currently in use. However, the advent of the 14th amendment created
US citizenship in the late 1860s as a recognized ÒvesselÓ of the United States in commerce and
under military (emergency) rule after ÒcivilÓ war and occupation. And so we must comprehend
terms not by their current or outdated use, but by their motive and intent when they are used in
their perspective art form. That which is in use today may be obsolete tomorrow, and then may be
in use again next year.

!525
 —=—

“I am forgotten AS A DEAD MAN OUT OF MIND: 


I am like a broken vessel.”


—Psalms 31:12, KJB

—=—

“…And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through
the temple.”
—Mark 11:16, KJB

—=—

“Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one
vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?”
—Romans 9:21, KJB

—=—

“If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto
honour, sanctiÞed, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto
every good work.”
—2 Timothy 2:21, KJB

—=—

“But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto
me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of
Israel…”
—Acts 9:15, KJB

—=—

We must know our master (god) in order to comprehend what type of vessel we are. As God’s
vessels are GodÕs Creation of manÕs mind, body, and soul in Natural unity, man needs no artiÞcial
(legal) ship to be a vessel unto God. Only dead legal things need the dead legal vessel of
personhood as a citizen-ship.

StrongÕs deÞnes the word vessel as used here as one of two dualistic natures.

Firstly as:

“METAPHOR: of a man: (of a quality), a chosen instrument [or ‘vessel’] Acts 9: 15, (and) in a
base sense, AN ASSISTANT in accomplishing evil deeds [English ‘TOOL’].”

—=—

!526
Remember, the word tool = dummy = agent = strawman!

And secondly, as:

“A VESSEL: to be used in performing religious rites, unto honour, i.e. for honorable use,
unto dishonor, i.e. for a low use (as a urinal) into which wrath is emptied — MEN
APPOINTED BY GOD unto woe, Þtted to receive mercy… is used of a woman, as the vessel
of her husband…”

—=—

Over and over we see the same concept in law. Either you are a vessel (receptacle) of God’s Nature
and Word (Son) or you are a vessel (ship) in mammon (commerce) for government (the principal of
a mutual agency relationship). But you simply cannot be both.

To legally (artiÞcially) corrupt the blood is to extinguish manÕs status as one that can hold land or
be heir to land through inheritance, and therefore acts to extinguish his posterity and place in the
sovereignty. This is to say that in mammon man is valued in the price of money, not in the priceless
blood of christ. To “attain” a state of “der” is to become a Þctional beast of burden as considered by
the state. This is the birth of sin (artiÞciality), and we act in that permanently contracted sin (of
personhood) under government. Sadly and in ignorance, it is our parents who confess (inform) our
attainder at birth, dooming (judging) us to servitude as wards of the state in condem-nation. In
fact, the entire commercial structure of the United States runs purely on the fact of attainder, the
virtual tainted blood of the population of man in citizenship to the United States. The constitution
protects only negatively those private men by their blood (the private People of the individual
States) and by their will, as they are not legally considered as subjects to (under) the United States,
but are recognized as the Þctional ÒsovereigntyÓ (People/States) over that multitude of govern-
ment citizen-ships (property) of the United States. The creator controls… Public citizens of the
United States pledge themselves to the private People (States) and are bound by the legal govern-
ment of that People’s (union of States) creation through agency. But US citizen-ships are not the
People (note the capitonym), for they are only members of the United States, and not domiciled in
any of the individual private or “several” States.

This will be very difÞcult for the ÒpatrioticÓ reader to comprehend and accept, for we have been
taught lies about our own personal status all our lives by those who proÞt by our ignorance.
However, the reader should know from this point on that if he or she is acting in a public person
(citizen-ship) as a commercial vessel of the United States, then he or she is not being considered
under the law of the individual States as a private citizen of the State wherein they reside with all
rights reserved. To be public is to be subject to government and considered only as a commercial
vessel (surname). To be private is to be part of a LEGALIZED “sovereign” People above govern-
ment (with no federally registered public id-entity or surname of Caesar). Anything public is
always subservient to that which is private. Anything public is an agent or property of something
principal and private. A private citizen is considered only by his blood, while a public person is
considered as having no inheritable blood, called only by his incorporated state-issued surname
and numerical mark. A private man is always considered non-commercially, and so he needs no
ship to sail on the seas of United States “interstate” commerce under maritime and admiralty law. A
public person is subject to commercial law.

More on the history and foundation of this public vs. private status will be explained throughout
this work. But for now, let us make sure that we comprehend the difference between this public
and private personage. For all persons regardless of status have some political consideration,
obligation, privileges and immunities in law.

!527
 —=—

“There are no political solutions to spiritual problems… If the Creator

put it there, it is in the right place. ”



—Unnamed indian Chief, 1876

—=—

Things are either of Nature (spiritual) or they are political (artiÞcial), and so we must ask how the
nation (law) considers us in a political way.

POLITIC - adjective - [Latin politicus; Gr. A CITY.] 1. Wise; prudent and sagacious in
DEVISING and PURSUING measures adapted TO PROMOTE THE PUBLIC WELFARE;
APPLIED TO PERSONS; as a politic prince. 2. Well devised and adapted to the PUBLIC
PROSPERITY; APPLIED TO THINGS. This land was famously enriched, With politic grave
counsel. 3. INGENIOUS IN DEVISING AND PURSUING ANY SCHEME OF PERSONAL
OR NATIONAL AGGRANDIZEMENT, WITHOUT REGARD TO THE MORALITY OF
THE MEASURE; cunning; ARTFUL; sagacious in ADAPTING MEANS TO THE END,
WHETHER GOOD OR EVIL. I have been politic with my friend, smooth with my enemy. 4.
Well devised; ADAPTED TO ITS END, RIGHT OR WRONG. (Webs1828)

POLITICAL - adjective - [supra.] Pertaining to policy, or to civil government and its

ADMINISTRATION. Political measures or affairs are measures that respect the government
of a nation or state. So we say, political power or authority; political wisdom; a political
scheme; political opinions. A good prince is the POLITICAL FATHER of his people. THE
FOUNDERS OF A STATE AND WISE SENATORS ARE ALSO CALLED POLITICAL
FATHERS. 1. PERTAINING TO A NATION OR STATE, OR TO NATIONS OR STATES, AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM CIVIL OR MUNICIPAL; as in the phrase, political and civil
rights, the former (political) comprehending rights that BELONG TO A NATION, OR
PERHAPS TO A CITIZEN AS AN INDIVIDUAL OF A NATION; and the latter (civil)
comprehending the LOCAL RIGHTS OF A CORPORATION or any MEMBER of it.
Speaking of the political state of Europe, we are accustomed to say of Sweden, she lost her
liberty by the revolution. 2. PUBLIC; DERIVED FROM OFFICE OR CONNECTION WITH
GOVERNMENT; AS POLITICAL CHARACTER. 3. ARTFUL; skillful. [See Politic.] 4.
Treating of politics or government; as a political writer. Political arithmetic, THE ART OF
REASONING BY FIGURES, or of making arithmetical calculations on matters RELATING
TO A NATION, ITS REVENUES, VALUE of lands and effects, PRODUCE of lands or
manufactures, population, etc. Political economy, THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE
REVENUES OF A NATION; or the management and regulation OF ITS RESOURCES AND
PRODUCTIVE PROPERTY AND LABOR. Political economy comprehends all the measures
by which THE PROPERTY AND LABOR OF CITIZENS ARE DIRECTED in the best
manner TO THE SUCCESS OF INDIVIDUAL INDUSTRY AND ENTERPRISE, and to the
public prosperity. Political economy is now considered as a science. (Webs1828)

PUBLIC - adjective - [Latin publicus, from the root of populus, people; that is, PEOPLE-LIKE.] 1.
Pertaining to a nation, state or community; extending to a whole people; AS A PUBLIC
LAW, WHICH BINDS THE PEOPLE OF A NATION OR STATE, AS OPPOSED TO A
PRIVATE STATUTE OR RESOLVE, which respects an individual or a corporation only.
Thus we say, public welfare, public good, public calamity, public service, public property. 2.
Common to many; current or circulated among people of all classes; GENERAL; as public
report; public scandal. 3. Open; notorious; exposed to ALL PERSONS without restriction.
Joseph her husband being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was
minded to put her away privily. Matthew 1:1. 4. Regarding the community; DIRECTED TO
THE INTEREST OF A NATION, STATE OR COMMUNITY; as public spirit; PUBLIC

!528
MINDEDNESS; OPPOSED TO PRIVATE OR SELFISH. 5. Open for general entertainment;
as a public house. 6. Open to common use; as a public road. 7. In general, public expresses
something COMMON to mankind at large, to a nation, state, city or town, AND IS
OPPOSED TO PRIVATE, which denotes what belongs TO AN INDIVIDUAL, TO A
FAMILY, TO A COMPANY OR CORPORATION. Public law, is often synonymous with
THE LAW OF NATIONS. - noun - The general BODY of mankind or OF A NATION, state or
community; THE PEOPLE, INDEFINITELY. The public is more disposed to CENSURE than
to praise. In this passage, public is followed by a verb in the singular number; but BEING A
NOUN OF MULTITUDE, it is more generally followed by a plural verb; the public are. In
public in open view; before the people at large; NOT IN PRIVATE OR SECRECY. In private
grieve, but with a careless scorn, In public seem to triumph, not to mourn. (Webs1828)

PRIVATE - adjective - [Latin privatus, from privo, to bereave, properly to strip or separate;
privus, singular, SEVERAL, PECULIAR TO ONE'S SELF, that is, SEPARATE; rapio, diripio,
eripio; privo for perivo or berivo.] 1. Properly, separate; UNCONNECTED WITH OTHERS;
hence, PECULIAR TO ONE'S SELF; belonging to or concerning an individual only; as a
man's private opinion, business or concerns; private property; the king's private purse; a man's
private expenses.. 2. Peculiar to a number in a joint concern, to a company or body politic; as
the private interest of a FAMILY, of a company or of A STATE; OPPOSED TO PUBLIC, OR
TO THE GENERAL INTEREST OF NATIONS. 3. Sequestered from company or observation;
SECRET; secluded; as a private cell; a private room or apartment; private prayer. 4. NOT
PUBLICLY KNOWN; not open; as a private negotiation. 5. NOT INVESTED WITH PUBLIC
OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT; AS A PRIVATE MAN OR CITIZEN; private lift. A private
person may arrest a felon. 6. Individual; personal; IN CONTRADISTINCTION FROM
PUBLIC OR NATIONAL; as private interest. PRIVATE WAY, IN LAW, IS A WAY OR
PASSAGE IN WHICH A MAN HAS AN INTEREST AND RIGHT, THOUGH THE
GROUND MAY BELONG TO ANOTHER PERSON. In common language, a private way
may be a secret way, one not known or public. A private act or statute, is one which operates
on an individual or company only; OPPOSED TO A GENERAL LAW, which operates on the
whole community. A private nuance or wrong, is one which affects an individual. In private
secretly; NOT OPENLY OR PUBLICLY. - noun - A secret message; particular business.
[Unusual.] 1. A common soldier. (Webs1828)

RIGHT OF PRIVACY - The right to be LET alone, the right of a person to be FREE FROM
UNWARRANTED PUBLICITY. The right of an individual (or corporation) TO WITHHOLD
HIMSELF AND HIS PROPERTY FROM PUBLIC SCRUTINY, IF HE SO CHOOSES. It is
said to exist only so far as its assertion is consistent with law OR public policy, and in a
proper case EQUITY WILL INTERFERE, IF THERE IS NO REMEDY AT LAW, to prevent an
injury threatened by the invasion of, or infringement upon, this right from motives of curiosity,
gain, or malice…. (Black4)

EQUITABLE - That which is in conformity to the natural law. (Bouv1856)

EQUITY - …2. In a MORAL SENSE, that is called equity which is founded, ex oequo et bono, in
natural justice, in honesty, and in right. (Bouv1856)

EQUITY - …In an enlarged, LEGAL VIEW, "equity, in its true and genuine meaning, is the
soul and spirit of the law; POSITIVE LAW IS CONSTRUED, and RATIONAL LAW is made
by it. In this, equity is made synonymous with justice; in that, to the true and sound
intpretation of the rule.” …This equity is justly said to be a SUPPLEMENT to the laws; but it
must be DIRECTED BY SCIENCE. THE ROMAN (PAGAN) LAW WILL FURNISH HIM
WITH SURE GUIDES, AND SAFE RULES. In that code will be found, fully developed, the
Þrst principles and the most important consequences of natural right. "From the moment
when principles of decision came to be acted upon in chancery," says Mr. Justice Story, "THE
ROMAN LAW FURNISHED ABUNDANT MATERIALS TO ERECT A SUPER-

!529
 STRUCTURE, at once solid, convenient and lofty, ADAPTED TO HUMAN WANTS, and
enriched by the aid of HUMAN WISDOM, EXPERIENCE and LEARNING.” (Bouv1856)

RATIONAL - adjective - [Latin rationalis.] 1. Having reason OR THE FACULTY (CAPACITY)

of reasoning; endowed with reason; opposed to irrational; as, man is a rational BEING;
BRUTES ARE NOT RATIONAL ANIMALS. It is our glory and happiness to have a rational
nature. 2. AGREEABLE TO REASON; opposed to absurd; as a rational conclusion or
inference; rational conduct. 3. Agreeable to reason; not extravagant. 4. ACTING IN
CONFORMITY TO REASON; wise; judicious; as a rational man. - noun - A rational being.
(Webs1828)

RATIO - Rate; proportion; degree. REASON, or UNDERSTANDING. Also a cause, or

GIVING JUDGMENT. (Black4)

—=—

Hopefully at this point the reader should be able to distinguish the difference between the actual
state of Being that is privacy (verb) and the legal notion of a permissive legal “right” of privacy
(noun). One is of God and one is of the state. One is permanent and one is temporary. One requires
a vessel (person/status) while one is a state of being person-less. One reserved his rights and the
other abandoned his Natural rights to obtain legal ones. And only one suffers under the law of
man.

—=—

“A thing is private which is NOT COMMON.”

—RES PROPRIA EST QUAE COMMUNIS NON EST. Le Breton v. Miles, 8 Paige (N.Y.) 261, 270. (Black4)


—=—

Likewise, the difference between Natural and legal equity as opposed to each other should be
noted here, and the Roman humanistic origins of man’s legal notion of legalized and forced equity
is explicative of our current corrupted state of civil life in spiritual death. And so we may conclude
that man’s ability to act according to the Natural Law in True equitableness is an act of not con-
forming to the reason of other men, for to arrive and be Þxed in a state of common sense, or
common reason, is to Live by reason alone without spiritual context and balance. For it is only the
capacity to reason, and not proper reasoning that is required by law, as legal capacity. In other
words, to reason and to be able to reason is considered as the same thing, as the requirement for the
capacity of legal personhood. However, our reason is most often concluded for us by our surrogate
“father” the state we act per the son of (in the person of), manifesting through the strict legal law
and cultural and amoral ethics imposed by it. We need not reason for ourselves, for government
sets the standards of fallacious reasoning through the instilling of public-mindedness in education,
media, entertainment, corporate religion, and other controlled tools of cultural guidance. It makes
choice obsolete.

Perhaps the most important maxims of law dealing with equity are these:

—=—

“Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a remedy.


(Where there is a right, there must be a remedy)”
—ubi jus ibi remedium (Black4)

—=—

!530
 —=—

“Where there is no law, there is no transgression, so far as relates to the

world.”
—UBI NON EST LEX, IBI NON EST TRANSGRESSIO, QUOAD MUNDUM. 4 Coke, l6b. (Black4)

—=—

In the world of man, to cause there to be no law is as simple as issuing legal license, permit, or
merely “legalizing” that which is against the Law of God. In this way, the legal system of law (of
the Þction) pretends to void out the Law of Nature (of Reality). But the spiritual Nature of the
Natural Law offers no such hiding places, the stain of transgression against GodÕs Word (Law)
being without such licensure or other exceptions. There is no excuse to break the Law of Nature,
including doing so though the art of make-believe in the unnatural world and law of man. To be
clear, Jehovah knows no Þctions, offers no licensure or permissions from ßatteringly titled men,
and certainly recognizes nothing of the false world of legal persons, places, and things. This must
be the foundational principle of all considerations of what is Law. And to be the sons of God, we
must therefore become the Law, the enforcers of the Word, the protectorate of GodÕs Creation and
ensurer of its Source.

—=—

“That being justiÞed BY HIS GRACE, WE SHOULD BE MADE HEIRS

according to the hope of eternal life… BUT AVOID FOOLISH
QUESTIONS, AND GENEALOGIES, AND CONTENTIONS, AND
STRIVINGS ABOUT THE LAW; for they are unproÞtable and vain.”
—Titus 3: 7 and 9, KJB

—=—

A son of God, one acting in eternal Life, is as the sheriff; the upholder of Nature and its Law over
the land and against those whose design is to destroy or alter it. There is no room for mere paciÞsts
here, for those who would watch and do nothing. This is a permanent spiritual war against
principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness (Þction) of this world, against spiritual wicked-
ness in high places (church and state). And as we know, these men pretend their power by worshiping
such vain genealogies and idols, and by obeying only their own strictly written contentions of law.

We must remember to examine these maxims by their adversarial meanings as well, as to what
they mean when picked apart and not merely taken as wisdom. In other words, what happens
when the devil applies these principles towards that which is adversarial to their christ-like
intentions? In worldly affairs, within such vain and unspiritual actions, no ÒpersonÓ may cause
harm unless a law speciÞcally declares that action as legally permitted. And yet the scriptural,
moral Law would certainly be broken without question.

The equity maxim above has an especially horriÞc and destructive hidden meaning. When we
rephrase it to its actual legal intent, knowing that positive (strictly enforced) legal equity (noun) is
not the same as negative (a voluntary, unenforceable duty toward) Natural equitableness (verb), we
Þnd that what this is really telling us is that the government and Bar Association will allow all
wrongs and crimes against Nature and Life Itself as long as remedy for such crimes is available.
The law thus assumes that every man may be paid off in mammon, that every man has a price that
will cause his abandonment of God and any moral compass (direction). In other words, money
may be replaced for the punishment of crimes. Remedy is, as reparations, a sort of legalistic

!531
forgiveness for crime by acceptance of money, a valuation put upon fraud that also legally forgives
that crime via compensation. The legal system suffers (allows) all sorts of wrongs upon the persons
(strawmen) that respect it as long as some monetary compensation (remedy) is able to be sued out
for those licensed crimes. Thus, under this principal of logic, whole countries may be decimated in
commercial wars with the press of a button as long as “reparations” are paid to the future
generations of those killed. And so the heirs of those former slave-holding private men who created
this legal nation are allowed to keep the spoils of their forefathers’ commercial ventures in slavery
simply because the nation has allowed remedy (reparations) to be paid to those families. Of course
all of these “reparations” as monetary remedy are paid out of the public coffers, which means that
every single common man (goyim) in citizen-ship that never had anything to do with slavery is
footing the bill as part of the exaction of their performance debt, while the private landholders that
were the only slaveholders (about 1.5% of the actual “white” population) continue to extort all
common men regardless of color or public status through their national districts and taxation of all
registered subjects (voluntary slaves). And we don’t even discuss the recorded history of so many
black slave-traders and holders both in America and in Africa, for that would destroy the useful
race divisions that help continue the illusion of romanticism and equality, of “civil rights” in
government. Equal but separate… the perfect, paradoxical recipe for the propagandists of
patriotism, the pirates of reason and common sense.

—=—

“A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superÞcial

appearance of being right, and raises at Þrst a formidable outcry in
defense of custom.”

“One of the strongest natural proofs of THE FOLLY OF HEREDITARY

RIGHT IN KINGS, is, that NATURE DISAPPROVES IT, otherwise, she
would not so frequently turn it into ridicule by giving mankind an ass
for a lion.”
—Thomas Paine, from ‘Common Sense,” 1776 (separate quotes)

—=—

Let us never forget with whom we are dealing. Perspective is everything. Of course a man acting in
sovereignty, as part of the kingship, and as godhead over other men will always claim habitual,
unthinking, customary reason to be as the bright light of god (as him Self) and the excuse of his
unreasonable authority. The word reason as used in man’s law can only be a term of legal parlance,
and so we can see that in its artiÞce of legal exploit it stems from the word ratio. All of man’s law is
a monetary valuation under mammon, always leaning towards a secular proÞt model. It is quite
reasonable to assume that 2 + 2 = 4 in any honest and Naturally equitable setting. It is also quite
legally reasonable that a man’s property can be taken with just compensation (remedy), as if money
could in actuality be even remotely equal to (the same as) anything in Reality. But let us never be
cursed to forget that similitude is never sameness, no matter how sacred that re-presentation of the
Real is held or coveted. Do not be fooled any longer by such thought patterns as we have all been
made accustomed to, where money may cure (remedy) the crimes of church and state against us,
including our own crimes within the artiÞcial church and state and against each other.

2+2 = 4 is only term of art, an equation of Þction, as a Þxed law of a set and sacred (cursed) number
code by man. It applies only to that which conforms to its speciÞc code. Its existence relies on man’s
strict written law and adherence to those values assigned by man to those numbers (terms of art).

But I dost protestÉ 2 dozen added to 2 dozen = 48!

!532
Fixed and deÞned language is everything and yet at the same time it is no thing. To respect it in
whatever form it appears over the Reality of that for which it re-presents is akin to satanism. It is to
worship and make falsely sacred (cursed) the Þre of what is not self-evident.

Please do not mistake this Reality (Truth) with the notion that this author is suggesting that all
numbers are somehow evil. This would be a logical fallacy, a ridiculous ad hominem, a poisoning
of my well, and a strawman argument (or any of a number of other logical fallacies). It is the legal
society that puts such adversarial thoughts into our heads, so that we Live always in confusion by
our own false and prejudicial (pre-judged) conjecture without veriÞcation of source. We have even
learned to judge each other by our numbers, by our Roman age or legal, resident zip code. It is only
how we see and respect artiÞcial things that causes such conceptualizations of moral goodness or
evilness. It is only when we hold as sacred the name, number, or other image higher than GodÕs
Nature of Reality that the cursed state (personiÞcation) of our Being is created.

—=—

“Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact.


Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.”
—Marcus Aurelius

—=—

“History is the lie commonly agreed upon.”

—Voltaire

—=—

“The falsiÞcation of history has done more to mislead humans than any
single thing known to mankind.”
—Jean-Jacques Rousseau

—=—

As an example, while it is a self-evident Truth that we need what is named as oxygen to Exist,
oxygen needs no name or numerical equation to Exist. We see the trees move when oxygen is
blown upon them, but the appearance is never the actual substance. What is the substance of what
is named as oxygen Exists despite our common or scientiÞc names for it. It Exists despite whatever
mathematical equations and opinions we use to express the fact of its actual Existence. Men, too,
also Exist in self-evidence, yet need no name to Exist. That is, unless we are referring to an artiÞcial
existence as a status (person) in the legal realm of Þction. No story or history could be told without
the artiÞce of the artiÞcial names of the persons, places, and things used to describe it. Yet True
history happened despite any of these Þctional descriptions and names (nouns). History is not built
of words. Only manÕs perceptions of history is built upon words, for no man can Truly know
history. It is our respect of the power of the names, numbers, and false images that conÞrms and
ratiÞes the big lie; the idolatry of the image, the ßattering titles, and the respect of the imaginary
form over the Reality of True substance.

Who among us has not sold our Self to money? To Þction? Who among us does not treat money as
a perfectly reasonable and Real tool? And who among us can possibly call ourselves free if the
money of another binds our potential for reasoning and for Living in a Purely spiritual Life and
Law?

!533
 —=—

“The way to crush the bourgeoisie (e.g., middle class) is to grind them
between the millstones of taxation and inßation.”
—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Jewish, Russian leader of the Bolshevik Revolution

—=—

This term bourgeoisie will be discussed later, but it is deÞned as inhabitants having the rights of a
citizen-ship and political rights in a city (municipal corporation). In other words any national,
districted, public citizen-ship of any nation Ñ the common, general population; all strawmen
(property) regardless of wealth.

A child (legal entity) borne (birthed) into the legal matrix and illusion of mammon can only
perceive reason according to that artiÞcial construct. Thus, most of our capacity for reason is of an
artiÞcial source, making our reasoning ability only as good as that which we are taught and
exposed to by the agencies and agents of that artiÞcial legal matrix; the dungeon-masters. A ßawed
foundation can only lead to ßawed logic (dialectic) and rhetoric based on ßawed grammar
(adversaria), causing the so-called ÒtriviumÓ method of liberal arts to be a pointless tool and
endeavor when applied to the common, dog-Latin of the English language. A public teacher is a
publicly educated person, and so can only teach within that public legal matrix, not without. The
law of the legal code prevents any other methodologies to be expressed by its agents (teachers) in
its bestowed degrees and credentialism. They can only teach public-mindedness. The colorblind
can only teach the perspective and opinion of the colorblind. And yet the righteousness expressed
by those so conÞdent in their errors of reasoning through this language of illiteracy is the best
example of non-spiritual, non-self-evident reasoning. To argue and debate over the correctness of
the Þctions created by man, including all his artiÞce of language arts, is the prime example of
govern-ment (mind control).

Sadly, these statements will be taken as offensive by many readers. And yet Truth is only ever
defensive. To be offended by what is self-evident Truth is to be wise in oneÕs own conceit. It is to
love (believe) the lie and embrace the grand delusion. The origins of this system of pure logic with-
out spiritual consideration will be discussed in Volume II of this work, where we Þnd as much of a
miserable failure of any ancient society as we do in todayÕs system of government. Under this strict
logic, we Þnd history merely repeating itself by those who ignore the substance and lessons of that
history in lieu of and respect of the importance of the empty names of the persons, places, things,
and dates ascribed to it.

And so we must remember that reason alone, that is, reason and logic without spirituality, without
God (the Nature of Reality), is only a fabled tool of the legal Þction of church and state and its
agents (believers/lovers/minions). It is generally based on lies or at least on parabolic inaccuracies,
thus creating a false sense of right and wrong based solely on false or embellished information not
self-evident. Rulers (gods) rely on this false enlightenment, as the artiÞcial rubber-soul of their own
binding law, which bonds all of us in our rented houses. Thus reason without spirituality has
become the custom of all nations and all teachers even as a spirituality without reason has infected
all priests. Recreated truths sold without self-evidence is the name of the game. When the law of
man is in harmony with the Natural Law, then and only then is it reasonable. But then, what
purpose or use does any legal law serve if it is in exact servitude and sameness to the unwritten
Natural Law? None at all, except perhaps to add sanction and thus judgement (pretended justice
and punishment) to what is otherwise non-sanctionable (spiritual) and voluntary (unenforceable).
But the reason for the creation of legal (anti-God) law is designed for and will always be changed to
suit the needs of its false legal gods (creators), and speciÞcally to escape that bond of the Law of
God. It can never stand in True Equitableness, for it always has its own gods with military force
behind it.

!534
See here the devolution of reason in its application towards the principles of law:

—=—

“Reason in law is perfect equity.”

—RATIO IN JURE AEQUITAS INTEGRA. (Black4)

—=—

“Reason is the formal cause of custom.”

—RATIO EST FORMALIS CAUSA CONSUETUDINIS. (Black4)

—=—

“Reason is the soul of law; the reason of law being changed THE LAW
IS ALSO CHANGED… The reason of law is the soul of law.”
—RATIO EST LEGIS ANIMA; MUTATA LEGIS RATIONE MUTATUR ET LEX. 7 Coke, 7. RATIO LEGIS EST ANIMA LEGIS. Jenk.Cent. 45. (Black4)

—=—

“Reason is a ray of the divine light.”

—RATIO EST RADIUS DIVINI LUMINIS. CO. Litt. 232. (Black4)

—=—

“Reason and authority, the two brightest lights of the world.”

—RATIO ET AUCTORITAS, DUO CLARISSIMA MUNDI LUMINA. 4 Inst. 320. (Black4)

—=—

Hard not to spot the freemason diatribe and mystery rhetoric in some of these maxims, eh?

Of course a king (sovereign) would perceive authority as a bright light; that of a devil’s staff and
rod to rule by force. To a king, the violent subjection of all other men is a naturally reasonable,
perfect psychopathy. Reason will always be skewed by a man’s status in society, through the
beholder’s eye. The higher the status, the more his reason is warped according to his own falsely
perceived dignity and authority, until at some point all of those below him in persona and title are
condemnable, no better than cattle. This is why the scriptures teach over and over never to respect
the persons and ßattering titles of any man, and especially such a mark of falsehood upon thyself,
even in the mistaken replacement of Jehovah with Jesus Christ. To worship the personiÞcation of
Jehovah as christ (a part of the whole) without acknowledgement of the True Source and Nature of
Jehovah (the Creator of christ) is a fruitless adventure, though many Christians have turned to call
Jesus Christ as the Creator, as a separate, secondary god. But then, only within these false images
can authority be possible for those claiming to be “the sweet christ on Earth” like the Pope. And
only with respect of such ridiculously ßattering titles (like the ÒpopeÓ being as a temporal ÒChristÓ
with spiritual jurisdiction) is our own voluntary subjection to such lies in persona possible.

We must know that a “slave” may kill his “master” at any time, for the “master” is merely a
magical word given authority by the will of the man believing himself to be trapped in the title of
“slave,” which without scriptural, spiritual knowledge of the Law/Word of God’s Nature seems a

!535
perfectly reasonable and logical state of mind. It is the authority of those man-made words, the title
of the man, that must be Þguratively killed. The enemy is always Þction, not the man bearing it.
And we are all each otherÕs enemy in our respect of legal Þction and the titles its creators (gods)
create, even the supposed legal ÒequalityÓ presupposed upon of the goyim of the nations.

—=—

“IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ENSLAVE, MENTALLY OR SOCIALLY, A

BIBLE-READING PEOPLE. THE PRINCIPLES OF THE BIBLE are the
groundwork of human freedom.”
—Horace Greeley, founding editor of ‘The New-Yorker’ and ‘New York Tribune’ newspapers

—=—

To be clear, Òthe lawÓ is a bunch of words written on paper by mostly deceased men of old, whom
in their own imaginary ßattering titles acted in the empty legal name (noun) of magistracy (as
gods/lawmakers) in some Þctional government (corporation) they created for their own beneÞt
(trust). This legalistic law has no Life, no soul, and no actual spirit. We should never place the
qualities of Jehovah (Nature, Reality) upon or under the authority of manÕs art forms and customs,
especially his legalese and rhetoric of law built on purposefully fallacious logic (false dialectic).
Similitude is not sameness. The written, legal ÒlawÓ is not the unwritten Word/Law/Son of God. It
is of the self-evident Nature of no man. Nature is not made of words and the respect of Its Life and
Law should not be skewed by the selÞsh reasoning and symbols of man and mammon.

The concepts spoken of often in the Pro-verbs (parables) of the Bible speak to the importance of
Natural knowledge, understanding, and thus ultimately to spiritual (negative) wisdom. Those who
follow the ancient pagan, Latinized, humanistic liberal arts or ÒtriviumÓ method of education re-
state these scriptural terms literally as empty (artful) grammar, logic, and rhetoric. Logic is another
word for dialectic, which means to stand under (under-stand) whatever limited knowledge is
received, even if its source is Purely accidentally or intentionally adversaria. But we must always
differentiate between the concepts of knowledge and grammar. Knowledge of that which is self-
evident needs not grammar to fulÞll its Existence or correctness, for grammar is only manÕs
creation based on his ultra-limited perception, not on GodÕs self-evident intention of Creation. One
can easily learn and understand a lie and then logically proclaim its relevance and false truth with
clever but unspiritual, grammar-based rhetoric using only this methodology of liberal arts. In fact,
this is the origin of legalism dating back to the early, pre-christian Chinese empires that carried the
title of logicians, which again will be covered in volume II of this work. 


Most importantly, these logic-based societies were a miserable failure. Today, the liberal arts and
the subsequent use of logical fallacy in argument are amongst the arsenal of tools taught to the
attorney class and law society. And for just this reason, we must learn the spectrum of their usage
so that we may not be fooled and defeated by such artful terms borne (carried) by fallacious logic.

However, this notion of a conÞdent, even religiously adhered to dialectic of understanding is the
make or break mental condition that causes man to either embrace Truth or succumb to a well-laid
(kindled) lie as his accepted but false truth in perpetual convolution. Thus the quote above should
be taken to heart for any that have fallen pray to this method of purely logic-based rhetoric.
Dialectic (logic-based opinion) is indeed quite the opposite of spiritual freedom of thought. For
improper grammar (as proclaimed knowledge) can seem to be certain in its enlightenment, just as
Lucifer presents Itself in similitude to the Light of God.

To put this ÒtriviumÓ or Òclassical liberal artsÓ method into proper perspective, two things must be
understood. One is that the so-called trivium method may only be considered legitimate upon things
and concepts created by man, for no self-evident, self-Existent thing in Nature (Reality) need stand

!536
before such limited scrutiny of the words and logic-based ideas of man. The name of what is Real
may certainly be debated, but not the Reality the name represents. Thus the trivium may only
debate Þction. This is not good or bad, and indeed this method is a powerful tool in this regard. But
its limitations therein must always be at the forefront of our perspectives, lest our arrogance built
upon false truths manifests exactly as the scriptures warn, as the dog returning to its own vomit
(circular logic). Secondly, the trivium method is very much like the scientiÞc method. It is a law, and
the law of man is always impermanent. It can quite easily be used wrongfully to subjugate and
force a lie or unlawfulness (licensure) as the law, to call as legal “truth” what is self-evidently not
the Truth (of God’s Nature). It is a tool that must be applied and used correctly and with continued
open-mindedness, for it may only lead one to the artful truth of what is not actual, Natural Truth
(Jehovah). I would even say that these tools, such as these methods, should be used only by those
graceful enough to admit to the limits of not only their own minuscule rationale of the total of what
is available as collectable knowledge, but indeed to the almost inÞnite bounds of knowledge still
then available and undiscovered or undiscoverable. Such humility makes one’s own knowledge
and thus any singular dialectic based on that ultra-limited knowledge look like a leaf aßoat in an
ocean. To call the leaf as the One Truth according to science or some other liberal method of the
logic-based constructs of man is to ignore the inÞnite Reality and universe that Is Truth (verb).

This is the key to spirituality, for to know thy own limits is to know the potentiality and threshold
of thy Self as oneÕs own enemy. But in the logic-oriented, spiritually absent society we Þnd our-
selves in, both of these methods are instead worn as a sort of super hero-like cape and armor or
badge of false show, institutionalized to the point that possessing them as a ßattering title (that of
the noun/ßattering title of scientist or triviumist, if you will) causes their very intent to be skewed.
Such a pretended badge causes a special kind of indefatigable logical fallacy. It is thus used prima
facie as merely a surface appearance to “win” any argument by shoving the “trivium” or
“science” (empty words) in the face of one’s opponent in discourse. “Trivium” is a noun, and when
used correctly is a verb, an action, and should be a humility and limitation rather than a weapon or
a badge or arrogant ßattery and strict law or conclusion of rightness. And so without eloquence or
effect of passing on knowledge, the “trivium” itself (as a noun/title) therefore can be said to be its
own logical fallacy when used as a weapon of debate. It creates a false dialectic, a foundation-less,
unscientiÞc certainty, as the notion of I’m right simply because I followed the trivium method or the
scientiÞc method, despite the dog-Latin my grammar is written in and despite all the purposefully
occulted knowledge I’m unfamiliar with. If one’s source of grammar is in its essence false or
untrue, or even a half-truth if that’s really even possible, or is otherwise purposefully despoiled
and designed to mislead as so much adversaria out there does, so too will be the dialectic of logic
and resulting rhetoric (words). This over-conÞdence of what is truth without self-evidence spreads
like a cancer through the mind and through society, based on the rhetoric of he who “has the
trivium” as if it were the Force from Star Wars. And let us never forget that the entire scheme of the
attorney class is based on an education in the liberal arts, and worse, in the proper legal use of
logical fallacies to “win” their case. Ignore the message and attack the messenger, this is the way of
he who attorns.

—=—

“All theory, dear friend, is gray, 


but the golden tree of life springs ever green.”

—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

To profess theory as fact, this is the meme of false, institutionalized (corporate) science, govern-
ment, and religion, and shows the severe danger of false dialectic (logic-based opinion alone). The
entirety of the vaccine and drug industry relies on falsiÞed data and fallacious logic, as do so many
so-called “scientist’s” paychecks. More evidence that the title does not make the man.

!537
 —=—

“MOST SCIENTISTS ‘CAN'T REPLICATE STUDIES BY THEIR

PEERS’”

“Science is facing a "reproducibility crisis" where MORE THAN TWO-

THIRDS OF RESEARCHERS HAVE TRIED AND FAILED TO
REPRODUCE ANOTHER SCIENTIST'S EXPERIMENTS, research
suggests. This is frustrating clinicians and drug developers who want
solid foundations of pre-clinical research to build upon… Experiments
are supposed to be replicable. The authors should have done it
themselves before publication, and all you have to do is read the
methods section in the paper and follow the instructions. Sadly nothing,
it seems, could be further from the truth… Concern over the reliability
of the results published in scientiÞc literature has been growing for
some time. According to a survey published in the journal Nature last
summer, MORE THAN 70% OF RESEARCHERS HAVE TRIED AND
FAILED TO REPRODUCE ANOTHER SCIENTIST'S EXPERIMENTS.”
—BBC News report, dated February 22, 2017 with same title, By Tom Feilden, Science correspondent, Today programme

—=—

Most accessible public books are indeed adversarial to True knowledge. This is not unlike many
religions out there, whose practitioners and apologists certainly may lay claim to the correctness of
their secular, patriotic conduct and that of the mercenary United States military in the LEGALIZED
murdering of countless millions in the name of peace (free-ßowing commerce), a fallacious
interpretation of the scriptural, spiritual knowledge if ever there was one. Any creation/invention
of man, either physical or mental, should be used only under careful consideration and care, and
never without spiritual, scriptural Law as its superior check and balance.

—=—

“Wisdom is found only in truth.”

—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

“A lie told often enough becomes the truth.”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

We see here the danger in legalizing morals and Natural Law concepts from a negative (unwritten)
aspect into the legal authority of strictly written (involuntary) and violently enforced positive law
(lex scripta). The law solidiÞes and enforces the lie, forcing man to live by that lie and in support of
it while in a legal persona, while plugged-in to that legal matrix (law of Þctional things). Natural

!538
equity (under God’s Law) is a purely negative concept, meaning that man claims the understood
negative right (privy) to be left alone in one's private affairs by assuming the voluntary duty of and
towards all men by doing the same unto all others. Non-interference; a Law breakable only to
thwart unnatural (evil) actions against Nature. However, in the legalized artiÞce of what is named
as “equity,” it re-presents (through legal words) the negative duties of man into a contractual,
positive law, usually with the added intent of permissively breaking with that foundational,
scriptural Word (Son) of God’s Nature.

We must never forget that the legal law of today, that romanticized (from Roman times) “law of the
land” is not unique to the American constitution in any way, merely the same old repetitive legal
law of that moving, ever-evolving kingdom of the pagan Roman Empire. For the strict, civil law is
only the continued law of Rome, lex scripta, a creation of the Pope of the Church and State.

LEX TERAE - The law of the land. The phrase is used to distinguish this from the civil or
Roman law. 2. By lex terrae, as used in Magna Charta, is meant one process of law, namely,
proceeding by indictment or presentment of good and lawful men. In the constitution of
Tennessee, the words "the law of the land" signify A GENERAL AND PUBLIC LAW,
OPERATING EQUALLY UPON EVERY MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY. (Bouv1856)

LEX TERRAE - The law of the land. The common law, or the due course of the common law;
the GENERAL law of the land. Equivalent to “DUE PROCESS OF LAW.” In the strictest
sense, trial by oath; the privilege of making oath. Bracton uses the phrase to denote a
freeman's privilege of being sworn in court as a juror or witness, which jurors convicted of
perjury forfeited, (legem terrae amittant). The phrase means “the procedure of the old popular
law.” (Black4)

LEX SCRIPTA - Written law; law deriving its force, not from usage, but from express
legislative enactment; STATUTE LAW. (From the Latin Maxim) “If the written law be silent,
that which is drawn from manners and custom ought to be observed; and, if that is in any
manner defective, then that which is next and analogous to it; and, IF THAT DOES NOT
APPEAR, THEN THE LAW WHICH ROME USES SHOULD BE FOLLOWED.” This maxim
of Lord Coke is so far followed at the present day that, in cases where there is no precedent of
the English courts, the civil law is always heard with respect, and often, though not
necessarily, followed… (Black4)

WRITTEN LAW - or LEX SCRIPTA. This consists of THE CONSTITUTION OF THE

UNITED STATES, THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE SEVERAL STATES, THE ACTS OF
THE DIFFERENT LEGISLATURES, AS THE ACTS OF CONGRESS, AND OF THE
LEGISLATURES OF THE SEVERAL STATES, AND OF TREATIES. See Statute. (Bouv1856)

—=—

The constitution of the United States is lex scripta. So whatever subject-matter is not speciÞed in the
written law therein, or by custom, etc., reverts to the Roman (pagan) Law! This is anti-scripture! I
cannot stress the importance of this statement by Mr. Bouvier, whose 1856 dictionary was
commissioned by Congress and ratiÞed as a strict part of the Òlaw of the land.Ó

—=—

“The principles of the Roman law, being generally founded in superior

wisdom, have insinuated themselves INTO EVERY PART OF THE
LAW. Many of the reÞned rules which now adorn THE COMMON
LAW appear there WITHOUT ANY ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THEIR
PATERNITY, and it is at THIS SOURCE THAT SOME JUDGES DIP TO

!539
 GET THE WISDOM WHICH ADORNS THEIR JUDGMENTS. The
proceedings of the COURTS OF EQUITY and many of the admirable
distinctions which manifest their wisdom ARE DERIVED FROM THIS
SOURCE. TO THIS FOUNTAIN OF WISDOM THE COURTS OF
ADMIRALTY OWE MOST OF THE LAW WHICH GOVERNS IN
ADMIRALTY CASES.”
ÑBouvierÕs Law Dictionary, 1856, deÞnition for ÔSources Of The LawÕ

—=—

“That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, AND

CARRIED ABOUT WITH EVERY WIND OF DOCTRINE (LAW), BY
THE SLEIGHT OF MEN, AND CUNNING CRAFTINESS, WHEREBY
THEY LIE IN WAIT TO DECEIVE…”
ÑEphesians 4:14, KJB

—=—

“For whoremongers, for them THAT DEFILE THEMSELVES WITH

MANKIND, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there
be any other thing that is CONTRARY TO SOUND DOCTRINE (LAW)
…”
Ñ1 Timothy 1:10, KJB

—=—

“Jesus answered them, and said, 


MY DOCTRINE (LAW) IS NOT MINE, BUT HIS THAT SENT ME.”
ÑJohn 7:16, KJB

—=—

“And the scribes and chief priests heard it, and sought how they might
destroy him: for they feared him, because all the people was astonished
at his doctrine (Law).”
ÑMark 11:18, KJB

—=—

“Listen,” he said, “we're going up to Jerusalem, where the Son of Man

will be betrayed TO THE LEADING PRIESTS AND THE TEACHERS

!540
 OF RELIGIOUS LAW. THEY WILL SENTENCE HIM TO DIE AND
HAND HIM OVER TO THE ROMANS.”


—Mark 10:33, NLT

—=—

“…They bound Jesus, led him away, and took him to Pilate, THE
ROMAN GOVERNOR.”
—Mark 15:1, NLT

—=—

Note here that when the Bible states that the leading teachers and priests of the religious Law will
betray and sentence to die the son of Man, this is allegorical, and it means that the priest class will
seek to bypass and destroy the Law (Son/Word) of God for all men. Do you not see that this
prophesy has come True in every way, through the evangelists of mammon and through the
denominations of Roman (Universal), false Christianity? Remember, it was the pope that created
the Roman civil law (lex scripta), and that the civil law of the so-called “Jewish” people is not the
Bible, but the Talmud.

To bypass the religious law, which would not allow such a cold-blooded execution, the chief priests,
elders, and scribes of the Jews (those opposed to the New Law/Son) used instead the legalistic trickery of
the strict Roman law to attempt to convict and obtain license to put to death an innocent “person,”
not a man. This is a very important lesson (parable) being taught here. For to take upon oneself the
false law (doctrine) and persona of another, one that is speciÞcally opposed to the very moral fabric
of that Highest Law of Nature, one is literally betraying the Nature and respect of God. And this
exempliÞes proof that the legal law, the law of man, is always that which opposes GodÕs Law and
christ (Son/Word).

The Bible in its proverbs adamantly instructs us that he who is surety for another will most
certainly smart (be put in pain) for it. Understand this, and we understand the nature of Title 42,
section 1981 of the US Code…

All citizen-ships under the United States (in surety of a proprietary, US legal persona and surname) shall be
subject to pain (being smarted), punishment, taxation, license, and exaction (extortion) of every kind…

Remember, these are the price of your free-dom (franchise). Free-dumb…

A man cannot escape True equity, no matter how private he is or how sovereign he claims to be, for
the Natural Law is of a Purely equitable foundation, and includes the inherent right of Self-defense.
Man cannot escape his True Nature nor the responsibility resulting by his actions. But a man can
escape Þctional publicity and therefore the positively constituted and created law (lex scripta) of
man if he is at all times responsible for his own actions and avoids all commercially considered
activity by avoiding all things in the personhood of mammon (monetary transactions valued in
patented government currency considered as “interstate commerce”), while acting in the negative
state of duty to his fellow man in bringing no harm or trespass thereof.

Without blood consideration, no man holds the pre-tended elitist status of one of the privately self-
governed constituency of the sovereignty (We, the People), and thus cannot hold property through
blood inheritance. The personhood and citizenship attained at legal birth is only as a debtor, user,
and tenant. This is a criminal state of felony condemnation in censure. No blood, no heir… To place
manÕs person into legal and voluntary attainder is to mark a man as a beast of burden. The beast is
you!

!541
 —=—

“And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because
ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? For when THEY
SHALL RISE FROM THE DEAD, THEY NEITHER MARRY, NOR ARE
GIVEN IN MARRIAGE; And as touching the dead, that they rise: have
ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him,
saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of
Jacob? HE IS NOT THE GOD OF THE DEAD, BUT THE GOD OF THE
LIVING: ye therefore do greatly err.”
—Mark 12: 24-27

—=—

Think you know what this means in dog-Latin?

Do you think this is talking about Natural death or civil death, spiritual Life or spiritual death, as
the God of the Living and not the dead? And why would one who rises from civil life (Þgurative
death) into spiritual One seek to avoid the civilly binding contract of marriage by the legal state?

Because only Þctional persons (dead creations of the state) can be married under the stateÕs man-
made law and license! To be legally married, one must contract with the state in its legal person.
Men need no permission to make a vow (promise) of marriage to God. Only persons need per-
mission from their false god creator to be incorporated together as one legal “family.” Only a
spiritually dead, civil persona can get hitched by the state, a combination of two incorporated
persons (surnames), as two properties of the state becoming as one public, family corporation
(artiÞcial person) in law. True wedlock needs no contract and no government, for it is a vow to
God, the most binding promise of all, whereas a legal marriage is merely a contract of mammon, a
vow not to Jehovah but to the god of the church and state.

The God (verb) of the Living… for Life is Jehovah and Jehovah is Life.

—=—

“And HAVE NO FELLOWSHIP with the unfruitful works of darkness,

but rather reprove them… Wherefore he saith, AWAKE THOU THAT
SLEEPEST, AND ARISE FROM THE DEAD, AND CHRIST SHALL
GIVE THEE LIGHT.”


—Ephesians 5: 11 and 14, KJB

—=—

If you believe you must be physically dead to arise from the dead, then exactly whom were these
words addressed to? Was he speaking to a graveyard? Was he teaching those who could not hear,
that were not alive, or was he relating parabolically to those only dead of spirit and lost in the
darkness of artiÞce? Do we not label most of the public-minded multitude as the sleeping masses,
as sheep that lost their shepherd? Not even the staunch literalist can possibly believe that the use of
this Þgurative word dead refers to the rotting corpses of those already departed from this Life and
Existence. The parable is certainly lost on the fool, as the Bible intrepidly warns.

!542
How can one who legally claims to be in spiritual death (legal life) claim the power and protection
of the spiritual, moral Law (Light) by that of the Existing One, which is only the God of the Living
and spiritually minded souls of Living men (of Creation)? A man that enters himself into a
contractual dead pledge (in a citizen-ship) no longer has the authority and spirit of God’s Law by
his side. For an artiÞcial, civil life is Þguratively representative of a spiritual death in corruption of
blood. The Living man acting as agent for the dead person cannot partake in the blessings of the
Living, Permanent Being of heaven on earth (God’s Kingdom), for his existence is false, his law is
legal (anti-God), his blood is attainted, and his god is mammon. So he can only remain in hell; the
open-air debtor’s prison of legal jurisdiction and obligation for civil life-forms called persons
(debtors). We must realize that citizenship is contractually a voluntary spiritual death and a turning
away from Jehovah and the Law of Nature into pure Þction. It is a contract with the devil (lived
written in reverse). For personhood is a Þctional anti-Life, the opposite of Living (blood/spirit), the
opposite of the Reality of Nature. And the only god of the dead is the state, the nation (district),
through its self-proclaimed status in the pretended sovereign authority of magistrates, for man is
and forever will be the only creator of Þctional things. God (verb) Creates nothing artiÞcial, for this
is as impossibility. Nature, as a foundational self-evident Law, neither produces nor respects any
form of Þction. The inventions of man donÕt come pre-fabricated or pre-mixed.

Do you think, for instance, that when you get a contract of “life insurance” under your government
issued surname, that the “life” in question is your own? Of course not! A life in-SUR-ance is only for
the Þctional SUR-name, which is property of the state (United States or other legal government
corporation). It only covers the civil death of a Þctional legal person, which is thus certiÞed and
registered with a death certiÞcate. A manÕs death is self-evident, needing no closure or certiÞcation
from God (man’s Creator) to prove what is a negative, Natural occurrence, an Act of God (Nature).
Only a Þctional entity must be closed out in the balance sheets and accounting books of govern-
ment, for the man takes nothing of the artiÞces of this world with him. This is why all ÒbeneÞtsÓ
are held up until the positively declared legal proof of the Þctional, civil death of the Þctional person
is certiÞed by the government that owns its admixed name (proper noun). Of course, the Living
man for whom that person is insured will never be able to collect on that insurance, for the life of
the puppet depends upon the continued Life of its ship-master who operates it. Life insurance is
indeed a paradox unless you comprehend that the insurance does not cover any Creation of God,
but only the legal name (vessel) assigned in Þction as the strawman, the property of the state.

This is all part of the legal concept of surety, ensuring proÞtability in any and every way from
commercial entities. The State promotes insurance upon its own property (its status), and enjoys
the cosmic joke that man should pay premiums throughout his Life for the sureness of his own
death. Government certainly and with pleasure suffers fools who pay for the legal beneÞts of their
own demise, and invests that full sum payout until it is paid out to the beneÞciary. Everything is an
investment scheme, and a life insurance policy is literally the creation of money, the value of which
can be traded and invested by the bank. Of course corporations like State Farm have their own
bank and multiple corporate entities. Putting a wager upon your Natural Life (a sure bet) is big
business! Every human capital subject will pay dividends in that game. Again, in Reality, an
insurance policy is nothing more than the creation of an “immature” monetary instrument, which
the company uses as an investment tool for proÞt and gain until that money must be paid out to
the ÒdeadÓ personÕs willed beneÞciaries. Not family as by inheritance, but to whatever corporate
legal id-entity is listed in receivership. It may be a natural person or an artiÞcial person (corp-
oration). ItÕs all a scam to cause man to use his strawman signature to create new debt money into
mammon, without which the insurance corporation would have no capital. And you wonder why
they don’t want to pay it out? As for the man, the actor in citizen-ship, all he sees is the prize at the
end of his adventure in a spiritually dead life, one that in Life he will never himself obtain. The
reward is nothing but an inducement to contract, a carrot on a stick, just one of many of satan’s
illusions.

Ever noticed that a man can somehow be convicted and sent to prison for what are called as
“consecutive life sentences?” How is this possible… unless the life spoken of is not of this Reality of
Nature and only exists in the Þctional, legal realm? A man is by his blood destined to die but once

!543
in the Reality of his Life on Earth, but a legal person can live (in artiÞciality) as a corporation for
eternity in false immortality; in paper Þction. So the man, while acting merely as surety in bond to
the person, can only serve those so-called ÒlifeÓ sentences for as long as his Real Life-force under
God (in Nature) holds out while in that legal captivity. But the actual terms of the legal punishment
upon that legal person, thank God, can never be actually fulÞlled by the living man in his Reality of
Life in Nature. The time is written off as a valuable consideration in the end, for the imprisoning of
a man in person through his surety bond is merely another commercial enterprise for the proÞt of
the state.

Time is in-deed money.

Speaking of civil life, how many rose from the dead and into a spiritual Life (civil death) under God
in Nature, from Lazarus to Jesus, in the Bible? Without understanding the dualistic higher language
(higher = higher in authority), the common man will think of this as the simple, vulgar story of the
physical dying of these men; of an ancient, mini-zombie apocalypse perhaps. For it is only through
this duality of words in which a master wordsmith creates either confusion or comprehension. And
as we just read, christ (the Law personiÞed) tells all men to rise from this spiritually dead legal life
under false doctrine (law).

—=—

“Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, AND THE LIFE: he that
believeth in me, THOUGH HE WERE DEAD, YET SHALL HE LIVE:
And whosoever LIVETH AND BELIEVETH in me shall NEVER DIE.”
—John 11: 25-26, KJB

—=—

But wait a minute! How can a dead man buried deep in the ground believe in anything? The
literalist will literally kill other men over the perceived literal fact that this must be taken as a literal
interpretation. But you must be Living to have the capacity to believe in something, donÕt you?

In dog-Latin, this is like unto a riddle. It must be deciphered. In applying logic and reason here we
must surmise that christ absolutely and without question had to be referring to a Living man
partaking in civil (dead) life. ChristÕs message is to all of the spiritually dead living in civil (legal)
captivity and within the nativity bond of nations as a dead pledger in this debtorÕs hell. For that
message would be unheard among the already physically dead and buried empty vessels, soulless
husks absent of the spirit of Life that would allow such Belief (Pure Love, Truth, and Charity). In
the Þnality of physical death, obviously the spirit would already know its fate, and vulgar belief
would be unnecessary in the face of God.

To be clear, only Living men can Truly Be in belief (Love), for belief has no place after Life is
extinguished. Life is a prerequisite for belief, considering its demanding limitations upon the soul.
No brain, no heart, no beliefÉ And so to Live in Nature only for the expectation of some unknown,
undeÞne life after physical death is in fact a ridiculous notion perpetrated by many ancient,
barbarous, idolatrous religions from the dawn of recorded history. This is only an excuse to harm
Nature (GodÕs Creation) as if Creation is not the True evidence of God. And destruction of evidence
is a crime in both realms, which is why the anarchist legal church and state gives permissive license
for crimes against Nature (God). These institutions simply cannot exist without ignoring scripture
(knowledge).

It is important here to note that the word believeth (belief/love) is purposefully misapplied by all
corporate religions so that men may merely emotionally externalize God but never internalize
GodÕs Word and Law through their own actions (pro-verb). Again, we see the tenet of legalized

!544
“freedom of religion” here, where the name is believed in but the verb (actions) of that belief and
the application of that Supreme Law are ignored. And so, if I were to ask the reader to prove he
“believes” (Loves) in God, what proof would he show? What, if not the actions of man, may prove
the convictions of his moral belief? What, if not the willingness to die for one’s Belief (True Love,
Love of Truth), could possibly be proof thereof? For the simple act of citizenship in commerce and
therefore respect of mammon (money) is evidence only of false belief in the lies of false doctrines of
corporations (artiÞcial persons) of the state, which we call as legal churches and legal religions.

We may believe that we can build a barn… But unless we act upon our belief, the barn will remain
always a subject of the pure artiÞce of vulgar faith only (name only); a Þgment of imagination.
Until we physically take action to build it, it will remain unbuilt. Likewise, to merely believe with-
out True Love and devotion in the scriptures (or in the name of “God”) is not the same as acting
upon their guidance. And we must remember that a citizen-ship of the United States is bound to
believe and act under man’s legal law in surety and no other, and that acting under the scriptural
law would be illegal under man’s legal code and while under legal persona. Moral thought is
allowed. But moral action based on that belief (love) is not allowed without license from the state to
commit an illegal act of a legally (adversarially) considered equitable nature.

Think about that for a moment…

So why do these incorporated state churches wish for you to believe in but never act according to
GodÕs Word (Son)? Could it be that those magistrates are acting as gods over their own Þctional
creation, and that the ten commandments are clear that man should have no such false gods?

The sinner, the man living in the spiritual death engagement of personhood as a dead-pledge (mort-
gage), can rise from that state of dead being and become part of the Supreme and Permanent Being
of Nature once again, but only by acting upon his moral beliefs (Law) and against that of the legal
Þction (false doctrine). And in this state of the Reality of Life he can never be declared legally alive
in the Þction, for his body is only of the spiritual realm of Life. He can never die a spiritual death
again, unless he wills and consents yet again to that legal artiÞce which he knows is opposed to his
very Nature.

To believe in the law is to act according to the law. We obviously believe in government and its
false legal law more so than in God, for we are acting against God’s Law with every breath while in
a state of artiÞcial personhood. The power of choiceÉ

The Bible is not about some ethereal after-life that cannot be comprehended by man within this
realm of Existence. It is about staying spiritually, eternally Alive (without legally registered
beginning or end as birth and death certiÞcation) after civil death, remaining in GodÕs Realm of
Nature under GodÕs Law without falling back into the hell (debtorÕs prison) of legal Þction. This,
allegorically, is called as eternal Life, a spiritual Life under God free of legal death. God is the only
solution to the artiÞce of mammon, and mammon is likewise the only solution to God.

This spiritual Existence is the Natural state of man before his certiÞed birth into that matrix of legal
personhood; of simulated reality. It is simply a matter of choosing which master one wishes to
serve, God or mammon, just as the scriptures teach, and no matter what the consequence. God Is
and knows only the spirit of Life. Mammon knows only the form (valuation in money) of artiÞcial
life, and is the true soul of manÕs law. The spirit is destroyed when one is birthed into the artiÞcial
form of mammon, just as the spirit is released from that status of spiritual death when one is reborn
into God’s Nature by abandoning all aspects and respect of mammon.

If the reader still thinks this Biblical story is merely religious nonsense and “dogma” instead of the
foundation of all Law and of Life Itself as the Oneness of Jehovah (Existence), we have a lot of quite
down-to-earth revelations to explore. For this is the Bible as you’ve never been able to see it, with
True origin of grammar, without dogma and without the conÞdence game (faith) of the marriage
between church and state.

!545
 DOGMA - In the civil law. A word occasionally used as descriptive of AN ORDINANCE OF
THE SENATE. (Black4)

ORDINANCE - A rule ESTABLISHED BY AUTHORITY; a permanent rule of action; A

LAW OR STATUTE. In a more limited sense, the term is used to designate THE
ENACTMENTS OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION. The
name has also been given to certain enactments, more general in their character than ordinary
statutes, and serving as organic laws, yet not exactly to be called "constitutions." Such was the
"Ordinance for the government of the NorthWest Territory," enacted by congress in 1787… An
ordinance was otherwise distinguished from a statute by the circumstance that the latter
required the threefold assent of king, lords, AND COMMONS, while an ordinance might be
ORDAINED BY ONE OR TWO OF THESE CONSTITUENT BODIES. (Black4)

—=—

In other words, the dogma of the senate in government needs not the will of its common subjects
behind it. Ordinance (dogma) is the will and word of the gods. The legal law is created despite its
citizenships (commoners) to control their registered persons just as the church supplants its own
doctrines in lieu of the Bible to control its membership and steer us all away from the True
scriptural teachings that all men of God should be partaking in. Remember, a Bible reading people
cannot be enslaved, which is to say that a Bible reading people would never allow their Selves to be
replicated into Þctional citizen-ships under the dogma of evil men.

The senate = synthetic (dead) persons in the ßattering titles of government creating false doctrine.

Because the scriptures are antagonistic and subversive to church and state, perhaps this organized
deceit is understandable, though certainly not forgivable.

One of the most beautiful qualities inherent within this Law of Nature, to which we attribute to
God as Jehovah in that Permanence of Supreme Being, is in fact that very Permanence Itself. While
Nature and the Laws governing it never change, man’s law is quite opposite to this, changing at
the moment where the law gets in the way of man’s unrelenting progress towards overcoming his
own place in that Permanence of Being. Man’s law has no foundation in Permanence, even as its
very foundational constitution is amended to no end or limit. But perhaps most telling in
preponderance of this legal snake continuously speaking itself into a further existence of form as
words without substance, is the fact that man’s legal laws have no sacred permanence. For the
whole system is built on Þction. Its pillars are nothing if not completely interpretable and therefore
in a permanent state of opinionated alteration per the desire of the judicial, administrative whim.
For the law means nothing until presented in court, and a corruption of the judicial seat is the only
ingredient necessary to continuously destroy (and thus rebuild in man’s image) the intent of the
law. Of course, to judge is to have power, and all forms of power corrupt. Therefore, by this self-
evident Law of Nature where no such power Exists, all judges are inherently corrupt, without
exception!

—=—

“We are under a Constitution, BUT THE CONSTITUTION IS WHAT

THE JUDGES SAY IT IS, and the judiciary is the safeguard of our
liberty and of our property under the Constitution.”
—Charles Evans Hughes, 11th Chief Justice of the United States, 44th United States Secretary of State, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States,
and 36th Governor of New York

—=—

!546
 —=—

“We have seen that the American Constitution has changed, is changing,
and by the law of its existence must continue to change, IN ITS
SUBSTANCE AND PRACTICAL WORKING EVEN WHEN ITS
WORDS REMAIN THE SAME.”
—James Bryce, Chief Secretary for Ireland (UK), Ambassador to the United States of America (UK), President of the Board of Trade (UK), Under-Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs (UK), etc.

—=—

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to

say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must
of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conßict with
each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each.”

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to

say what the law isÉ If two laws conßict with each other, the Courts
must decide on the operation of each.  So, if a law be in opposition to
the Constitution… the Court must determine which of these conßicting
rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.”
—John Marshall, 4th Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, 4th United States Secretary of State, Member, US House of Representatives from Virginia, 1st quote from:
1803 [John Marshall and John Edward Oster, ‘The Political and Economic Doctrines of John Marshall’ (New York: Neale Publishing Co., 1914), pg. 307.) 2nd
quote from: Marbury v. Madison, 1803.

—=—

"Presidents come and go, but the Supreme Court goes on forever."
—William Howard Taft, 27th US president, 10th Chief Justice of the United States, 42nd United States Secretary of War, quoted from: c. 1910 [Richard Panchyk,
‘Our Supreme Court’ (Chicago Review Press, 2006), pg. 1.]

—=—

"No higher duty, or more solemn responsibility rests upon this Court
than that of translating into living law and maintaining this
constitutional shieldÉ for the beneÞt of every human being subject to
our Constitution — of whatever race, creed, or persuasion.”
—Hugo Black, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, US Senator from Alabama, quoted from: 1940 [Bill Swainson, ed., Encarta Book of
Quotations (Macmillan, 2000), pg.116.]

—=—

"The WORDS of the Constitution… are so UNRESTRICTED by their

intrinsic meaning or by their history or by tradition or by prior
decisions that they leave the individual Justice free, if indeed they do

!547
 not compel him, to gather meaning NOT FROM READING THE
CONSTITUTION BUT FROM READING LIFE.”
—Felix Frankfurter, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, quoted from: 1949 [Alpheus Thomas Mason, The Supreme Court from Taft to Burger
(LSU Press, 1979), pg. 14.]

—=—

"The life of the law has not been logic, it has been experience.… The
law embodies the story of a nation's development through many
centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms
and corollaries of a book of mathematics.”
—Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Chief and Associate Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court,
quoted from: 1880 [Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., The Common Law (1880; reprint published by The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd., 2004), pg. 1]

—=—

"The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the

hands of the Judiciary, WHICH THEY MAY TWIST AND SHAPE INTO
ANY FORM THEY PLEASE.”
--Thomas Jefferson

—=—

The illusion of the permanence and authority of man’s law and constitution cannot be understated
here, for it is this Þctional judicial authority alone that declares the virtual reality of the meaning of
manÕs law daily and according to the needs of the Þctional ÒnationÓ they represent in ofÞce. This
organized chaos stands starkly opposed to the Supremacy and Permanence signiÞed by the
equitable and unchangeable Law of GodÕs Nature as the scriptures teach. In this way, the legislative
law is merely the legalized simulation of law, having no actual Existence and solely based upon the
later opinions of the judicial that are placed upon it. Thus, to say that a legislative law is
ÒconstitutionalÓ or ÒunconstitutionalÓ is purely the rhetoric of fools, for this assessment cannot be
made by any body except the justices of the court. Evil men decide what is evil from evilÕs (ÞctionÕs)
perspective, and may only do so through legally granted, ßattering titles bestowed upon them by
presidents and electors. This is the reasoning of law-makers.

JUS DARE - To MAKE the law. (WCA1889)

JUS DICERE - To SAY what the law is; to APPLY the law. (WCA1889)

JUS DICERE, NON DARE - To declare, not to make, the law. The duty of a judge is TO
APPLY THE LAW AS MADE, NOT TO LEGISLATE. The courts ADMINISTER the law AS
THEY FIND IT; they are not to make or modify it. Hence, considerations as to expediency are
to be addressed to the law-making body. See Hardship. (WCA1889)

—=—

And this difference between making (creating) law and declaring (applying) the proprietary law
that is already made brings us to the notion of Òjudicial discretion,Ó which in this authorÕs opinion
is one of the most harmful legal concepts in that pretended legal existence. Here we can see that a
judge, as a god, truly is above the law he portends to follow. The administrative judge is the

!548
butcher of that which is created by the legislative gods. But we should never be fooled into
believing that these two “branches” of government are not in collusion. They are merely parts of
the same confederation (conspiracy). Everything, including law, is interpretable. Words are
transmutable. Art is permeable. Intention is repairable.

DISCRETION - A LIBERTY OR PRIVILEGE allowed to a judge, within the conÞnes of right

and justice, but INDEPENDENT OF NARROW AND UNBENDING RULES OF POSITIVE
LAW, to decide and act in accordance with what is fair, equitable, and wholesome, as
determined upon the peculiar circumstances of the case, and as discerned by his PERSONAL
WISDOM AND EXPERIENCE, GUIDED BY THE SPIRIT, PRINCIPLES, AND
ANALOGIES OF THE LAW… (Black1)

DISCRETION - Power or privilege of the court TO ACT UNHAMPERED BY LEGAL RULE.

When applied to public functionaries, discretion means a power or right conferred upon them
by law of acting ofÞcially in certain circumstances, according to the dictates OF THEIR
OWN JUDGMENT AND CONSCIENCE, UNCONTROLLED BY THE JUDGMENT OR
CONSCIENCE OF OTHERS. This discretion undoubtedly is to some extent regulated by
usage, or, if the term is preferred, BY FIXED PRINCIPLES. But by this is to be understood
nothing more than that the same court cannot, consistently with its own dignity, and with its
character and duty of administering impartial justice, decide in different ways two cases in
every respect exactly alike. The question of fact whether the two cases are alike in every color,
circumstance, and feature is of necessity to be submitted to the judgment of some tribunal…
(Black4)

DISCRETION - noun - [Latin, a separating. See Discreet.] 1. Prudence, or knowledge and

prudence; that discernment which enables a person to judge critically of what is correct and
proper, united with caution; nice discernment and judgment, directed by circumspection,
and primarily regarding one’s own conduct. A good man--will guide his affairs with
discretion. Psalms 112:5. My son, keep sound wisdom and discretion. Proverbs 3:21. 2.
LIBERTY OR POWER OF ACTING WITHOUT OTHER CONTROL THAN ONE’S OWN
JUDGMENT; as, the management of affairs was left to the discretion of the prince; he is left to
his own discretion Hence, To surrender at discretion is TO SURRENDER WITHOUT
STIPULATION OR TERMS, AND COMMIT ONE’S SELF ENTIRELY TO THE POWER OF
THE CONQUEROR. 3. Disjunction; separation. [Not much used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

So a judge has no set law under which to act or decide matters, and only relies on his own assumed
moral compunction, personal moral, amoral or immoral wisdom, and supposedly wholesome,
conscious opinion? And he is to base that opinion only upon the spirit and principals (maxims) of
man’s law? Is that not what a conqueror would be expected to do over his subjects? And are we not
submitting ourselves to these gods as our conquerors every time we Þctionally appear in their
strawman and respect their false, administrative judgements considering law?

Did not the scriptures warn us about respecting the laws and judgements of men over God’s?

—=—

“Every generation gets the Constitution that it deserves. As the central

preoccupations of an era make their way into the legal system, the
Supreme Court eventually weighs in, and nine lawyers in robes become
oracles of OUR NATIONAL IDENTITY.”
—Noah Feldman

—=—

!549
The only problem is that these later-added legal principles (maxims) of the law allow for the
totality of utter corruption in every way possible through contracts of volunteerism and by other
designs. They allow for the pretended, Þgurative destruction of GodÕs Law in a pretended, Þctional
realm and jurisdiction. They allow lies to be truth via the process of legal conÞrmation and
ratiÞcation. They allow Þction to be the virtue of a false reality. And they allow men to be gods and
slaves by ßattery of legal, Þctional title. All it takes is a bit of ignorance and the application of a
public education and man may consent to and become agent for just about any tyranny imaginable,
as long as it is dressed up as legal, patriotic justice.

ADJUDICATE - To settle in the exercise of JUDICIAL AUTHORITY. TO DETERMINE

FINALLY. Synonymous with adjudge in its strictest sense. (Black1)

ADJUDICATION - The giving judgment or decree in a cause; also the judgment or

pronouncing a given. Or the entry of a decree by a court in respect to the parties in a case. It
implies a hearing by a court, after notice, of legal evidence on the factual issue involved. The
equivalent of a “determination." And contemplates that, the claims of all the parties thereto
have been considered and SET AT REST. The term is principally used in bankruptcy
proceedings, the adjudication being the order which declares the debtor to be a bankrupt.
(Black4)

ADJUDICATIO - In the civil law, an adjudication. The judgment of the court that THE
SUBJECT-MATTER IS THE PROPERTY OF ONE OF THE LITIGANTS; CONFIRMATION
OF TITLE BY JUDGMENT. (Black1)

ADJUDGE - To pass on judicially, to decide, settle, or decree, or TO SENTENCE OR

CONDEMN. Judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction: equivalent of convicted and
sentenced. Implies A JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF A FACT, and the entry of a
judgment. Does not mean the same as deemed contra, under statute, only of an act of the court.
(Black4)

—=—

Imagine having the power to declare with an Executive military force backing oneÕs decisions just
what is the fact and intention of law, when we know that the principles of legality declare that any
lie or untruth can be declared judiciously as a fact (as white can be adjudged to be black, and a black-
skinned man like Barack Obama can be legally and by blood genealogy a Òwhite personÓ). You
donÕt need to imagine this, for it is the essence of the administrative system most of us consent to in
our public personas and actions. If this is the ultimate power, that of gods, and any power
ultimately corrupts man, then what man could possibly claim the right and responsibility to
adjudicate any other man even by his own apparent moral code and conscious?

The Bible seems to suggest this to be an impossibility, acknowledging the inherent corruption not
of man himself, but in all of manÕs designs and their inßuence upon all of man. The only
incorruptible man is one in Nature, under God alone, where no Þctions may effect his judgements.
For only in Nature and in Its Highest Law may manÕs intentions remain Pure (Natural). But then,
in this state of Being, in the Purest Love and Charity, no man would seek to be such a judge and
punisher of other men. Only corrupt men with blemished souls in false personas (masks) may
allow themselves to be judges under such a pre-tended ßattering title.

We must know that any law at any time and at the whim of the court, whether written or
unwritten, be it constitutional or not and whether known or unknown in history or precedent, can
be instantly, magically invoked through this adjudication process at any time. This is the nature of
judicial discretion, privilege, and authority. That is to say that there is no law because any law can
be made to suddenly exist or not exist at the pleasure of the court magistrates; the creators of
precedent. All deviations in the professed opinion of law being possible equates in Reality to Truly
having no law at all. And this, above all else, should scare the hell out of you…

!550
Even juries have the privilege of making void the law in each case, known as jury nulliÞcation!

—=—

“A new adjudication does not make a new law, but DECLARES THE
OLD; because ADJUDICATION IS THE UTTERANCE OF THE LAW,
and by adjudication THE LAW IS NEWLY REVEALED which was for a
long time hidden.”
—NOVUM JUDICIUM NON DAT NOVUM JUS, SED DECLARAT ANTIQUUM; QUIA JUDICIUM EST JURIS DICTUM ET PER JUDICIUM JUS EST
NOVITER REVELATUM QUOD DIU FUIT VELATUM. 10 Coke, 42. (Black4)

—=—

In other words, the meaning and intent of any law has the potential to be adjudicated (kept the
same OR CHANGED) and administered in any way and with any word-magic (opinion) through
the terms of art that its administrators (magistrate gods) see Þt. Truly, there is no law of man but
that which impermanently, Þctionally exists, as that which is destined to be altered. Thus manÕs law
is speciÞcally considered as temporary (not self-existent) next to GodÕs, changing just as quickly as
the fads of each generation permits. This allows the true intent of the state to remain hidden until
the time arises for it to be invoked through the kingÕs (sovereigntyÕs) court of administration.

But in the legal, commercial realm, the public law created by the sovereign People and their
governments are set up only to control their public agents and protect themselves, as the
citizenships and corporations under its agency relationship jurisdiction, which is not in any way a
form of Òconstitutional law.Ó

—=—

“A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the JUDGES, as a

fundamental law. It therefore belongs to THEM to ascertain its
meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from
the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable
variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and
validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the
Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, THE INTENTION OF
THE PEOPLE TO THE INTENTION OF THEIR AGENTS."
—Alexander Hamilton, excerpted from: “Federalist No. 78”

—=—

Of course the members of legislature are the elected agents of the combination (conspiracy) of self-
proclaimed ÒsovereignÓ People (landholders) of the several (private) States. Thus it is the States
(People) that stand in the federal capacity as public lawmakers, as the principal to which all other
United States agents, including public United States citizen-ships, stand under in surety through a
legally contracted persona (strawman/dis-ease). Most importantly, this means that a public person
(citizenship) is not a party to the negative protections of the State (People) created US constitution,
as will be thoroughly discussed. And so the public acts of that legislative body (The People as
represented in Congress assembled) effect only public persons and not the private People of each
private (several) State.

!551
In the end, just as all corporate state religions accomplish within their own professed and ever-
changing doctrines, and which stand purposefully in antithesis to the very bible scriptures they
pretend to emulate and follow, man’s legal law has no attachment to Reality, to Nature, to man, and
therefore to God (the Permanence of Creation). The Natural Law of God never changes, not by the
hand of man or by the Supremacy of Jehovah. But the legal law’s foundation is purposefully
movable, changeable, alterable, and thus in its essence purely non-existent in any permanent
substance, living only in its current form that may be changed at any moment. And this is why the
Bible instructs that no man should put faith in other men and speciÞcally into their imperfect legal
laws of always changing Þction.

—=—

“There was in a city a judge, which FEARED NOT GOD, NEITHER

REGARDED MAN… And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge
saith.”
—Luke 18: 2 and 6, KJB

—=—

“And said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man,
but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment.”
—2 Chronicles 19:6, KJB

—=—

“Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather,
that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother's
way.”
—Romans 14:13, KJB

—=—

“That your faith should not STAND in the wisdom of men, but in the
power of God.”
—1 Corinthians 2:5, KJB

—=—

“And be FOUND in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is

of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the
righteousness which is of God by faith…”
—Philippians 3:9, KJB

—=—

!552
 —=—

“But that NO MAN IS JUSTIFIED BY THE LAW IN THE SIGHT OF

GOD, IT IS EVIDENT: for, The just shall live by faith (Truth). AND
THE LAW IS NOT OF FAITH: but, The man that doeth them SHALL
LIVE IN THEM.”
—Galatians 3: 11-12, KJB

—=—

“Ye have plowed wickedness, ye have reaped iniquity; YE HAVE

EATEN THE FRUIT OF LIES: because thou didst TRUST in thy way, IN
THE MULTITUDE OF THY MIGHTY MEN.”
—Hosea 10: 13, KJB

—=—

“But as we were allowed of God to be put in TRUST with the gospel,

even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our
hearts.”
—1 Thessalonians 2: 4, KJB

—=—

“Oh how great is thy goodness, which thou hast laid up for them that
fear thee; which thou hast wrought FOR THEM THAT TRUST IN THEE
BEFORE THE SONS OF MEN!”
—Psalms 31: 19, KJB

—=—

Yet another purposeful miscommunication of the meaning of scriptural terminology in church

doctrine as a purposeful mis-transliteration is the notion of “fear” as a state of mind in name (noun)
only as opposed to a conscious guide for our actions (verb). This notion of fearing God seems like
an oxymoron if the reader or follower of the church doctrines does not seek the meaning of this
concept from its original source. For the term does not refer to the actual fear of Nature (God), as
that would be ridiculous. We are certainly a part of God’s Creation of Nature. So we would then
need to fear our own Selves, the part without (foreign to) the whole, as if we were not a part of
God’s Creation and Design. This notion of fear is one of reactiveness, as of the fear of harming
God’s Nature and transgressing from Its Laws. It is of course the opposing force against God that is
to be feared by men; the fear of what happens when we do not Live spiritually in and under God’s
Law of Nature (and by our own). For the nature of our positive actions against God can only result
in the exact dis-ease, poverty, debt, pestilence, devolution, austerity, and slavery to artiÞce in
mammon that we see today. To fear God negatively, in other words, is to Live according to God’s
Natural Law in duty at all times for fear of exactly what has happened to the world today for not
doing so. With True Faith and Trust in God’s Nature of Being, and by man’s purposeful harmony to
that state of Being, fear may manifest into Reality. The notion of fearing God is only the notion of

!553
what happens when God (and Its Realm of Nature) is not respected — the consequences of our
own actions against the best interests of ourselves and that Nature which sustains our very
livelihood and the essence of our Existence. To fear God is to fear the evils and wickedness that will
cause us dis-ease and end our very Life by respecting that which should instead be avoided by
embracing God’s Law and Natural, negative protection.

—=—

“The fear of the LORD (‘Jehovah’) prolongeth days: but the years of the
wicked shall be shortened.”
—Proverbs 10:27, KJB

—=—

Fearing God is no different from the fear of not eating healthy and working out to keep the body-
temple in proper Þtness and shape (in harmony with Nature), or any other preventative (negative)
concern. Fear causes one to avoid danger, while citizenship is a state of unavoidable danger and
thus an institutionalized fear of spirituality (religious, Lawful action). For do not forget, govern-
ment is a jurisdiction of intentional legal danger (deÞned as Òexposure to injury, loss, pain other
evilsÓ). And do not forget that under Title 42 of US Code, ÒpainÓ and other evils such as license and
exaction (extortion) are your legally bound Òequal rightsÓ under the doctrine of master and servant
that citizen-ship (subjection) falls under.

Please understand that fear and worship are in essence the same word, as the love of something that
necessarily requires the fear of that which is opposed to that loved thing, which is why the fear of
men in government and their legal matrix code is so dangerous. To fear God is to respect and
worship only GodÕs Design, to actively Þght the disrespect of any part of Nature (Creation), for evil
manifests only through the minds of men acting against and in place of (anti-) God. The con-
sequences of respecting such evil (artiÞce) against NatureÕs Design is what we would call as the
God’s (Nature’s) wrath, the unchangeable Design of Jehovah re-harmonizing Itself from whatever
dis-ease man may love and worship without fear. Worship (fear) of God equates to the com-
prehension and realization of what happens when we don’t! And so we are taught to instead fear
government and religion and dismiss Jehovah, even as we suffer because of that misplaced
worship of artiÞcial persons, places, and things in the Þction of false gods instead.

The fear one might feel while walking along a cliff where a single misstep might result in one’s
own physical injury or death, or that our trespass may start an avalanche upon the hikers below us;
this would be an example of how fear is a requirement for Life under God and the duty to protect
it. Only a fool fears not, for only a fool believes in and lives under the insured securities and false
protections of the Þctional word magic of legal persons, places, and things.

—=—

“And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, THAT IS
WISDOM; and to depart from evil IS UNDERSTANDING.”
—Job 28:28, KJB

—=—

Let us be clear here that wisdom is found only in Truth, and that christ’s actions in Jehovah are the
story of self-evident Truth against evil. If we do not fear the horrors of history, we are doomed to
repeat and Live them again. And yet this is a double-edged sword. For if we respect all history as
fact, we are doomed to live by (pretend) only the perceived but generally over-embellished

!554
consequences of a historical lie told often enough that it appears to us as Truth. We live instead
today within this modern legal lie based on the history of Roman law. History, quite simply, is not
of God but of men. There is no self-evidence in history. If we do not fear the Truth (the Real Nature
of Jehovah), we will easily believe in and fall prey to the big lie. If we do not fear Nature, we are
doomed to a dead life of non-spiritual existence without It. If we do not fear and respect our spouse,
we may Þnd ourselves in spiritual emptiness and working overtime due to alimony payments. If
we do not fear technology (art), we will become it.

Please note the difference above between wisdom and understanding. When we are asked whether
or not we “understand” our rights as sureties to legal persons (strawmen), a yes answer causes us
to depart from Good, from God’s Law of Nature, and to accept and consent to (stand under) the
authority of the legal Þction realm and its agents. Inversely, wisdom (knowledge) of God is not
enough. We must understand (stand under) God’s Law by departing entirely from the legal (anti-
God) matrix that enslaves us and keeps us from applying and expressing our spiritual wisdom
through the Love and Charitable Works of our understanding the authority of GodÕs Nature and
Law.

Following the Law of Nature is not the cause of fear but the solution to it. Webster describes this
notion of fearing God succinctly:

FEAR - noun - [See the Verb.] 1. A painful emotion or passion excited by an expectation of
evil, or the apprehension of impending danger. Fear expresses less apprehension than dread,
and dread less than terror and fright. The force of this passion, beginning with the most
moderate degree, may be thus expressed, fear dread, terror, fright. Fear is accompanied with a
desire TO AVOID OR WARD OFF THE EXPECTED EVIL. Fear is an uneasiness of mind,
upon the thought of future evil likely to befall us. Fear is the passion of our nature which
excites us TO PROVIDE FOR OUR SECURITY, ON THE APPROACH OF EVIL. 2. Anxiety;
solicitude. The principal fear was for the holy temple. 3. The cause of fear. Thy angel becomes
a fear. 4. The object of fear. Except the God of Abraham, and the fear of Isaac, had been with
me. Genesis 31:42. 5. Something set or hung up to terrify wild animals, by its COLOR or
noise. Isaiah 24:17. Jeremiah 48:43. 6. In scripture, fear is used to express a Þlial or a slavish
passion. IN GOOD MEN, THE FEAR OF GOD IS A HOLY AWE OR REVERENCE OF GOD
AND HIS LAWS, which springs from a just view and REAL LOVE of the divine character,
LEADING THE SUBJECTS OF IT TO HATE AND SHUN EVERY THING THAT CAN
OFFEND SUCH A HOLY BEING, and inclining them to aim at perfect obedience. THIS IS
FILIAL FEAR. I will put my fear in their hearts. Jeremiah 32:39. Slavish fear is the effect or
consequence of guilt; it is the painful apprehension of merited punishment. Romans 8:15.
THE LOVE OF GOD CASTETH OUT FEAR. 1 John 4:1. 7. The worship of God. I will teach
you the fear of the Lord. Psalms 34:7. 8. THE LAW AND WORD OF GOD. THE FEAR OF
THE LORD IS CLEAN, ENDURING FOR EVER. Psalms 19:9. 9. Reverence; RESPECT; due
regard. Render to all their dues; fear to whom fear. Romans. 13:7. - verb transitive - [Latin
vereor.] 1. To feel a painful apprehension of some impending evil; to be afraid of; to consider
or expect with emotions of alarm or solicitude. We fear the approach of an enemy or of a
storm. We have reason to fear the punishment of our sins. I WILL FEAR NO EVIL, FOR
THOU ART WITH ME. Psalms 23. 2. To reverence; to have a reverential awe; to venerate.
THIS DO, AND LIVE: FOR I FEAR GOD. Genesis 42:18. 3. To affright; to terrify; to drive
away or prevent approach by fear or by a scarecrow. [This seems to be the primary meaning,
but now obsolete.] We must not make a scarecrow of the law, setting it up to fear the birds of
prey. - verb intransitive - To be in apprehension of evil; to be afraid; to feel anxiety on account
of some expected evil. But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his
subtility, SO YOUR MINDS SHOULD BE CORRUPTED FROM THE SIMPLICITY THAT
IS IN CHRIST. 2 Corinthians 11:3. Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great
reward. Genesis 15. - noun - A companion. [Not in use. See Peer.] (Webs1828)

—=—

!555
Clearly christ feared only God and no other, super hero as he was. This is to say that, unlike most of
us, he had no fear of the false authority of government, or of the men acting as its agents. Mis-
placed fear is the very soul of citizen-ship. For fear is merely a sign and token of respect.

An example of this fear might present itself when reading a mortgage or any other contract without
truly comprehending the words within. Or it might come upon us when we spray poison on weeds
(Life) or crush the Life-force from one of God’s minute Creatures. The fear of God may manifest
when we clear-cut a forest with license from the legal authorities that pretend to exist, or when we
accept a paycheck and a public or military pension for our individual act in the butchering of
whole villages of men, woman, and children in the name of purely commercial wars for proÞt and
gain. For we do so not in GodÕs stead, but in that of the uniform of the Þctional nation we are
supporting and worshiping with our actions and inactions, bearing (showing respect of) its corp-
orate Arms as its prostitutes instead of bearing our own blood heraldry, and most importantly that
of the Blood of christ through our actions. It is this fear of the consequences and evil nature of our
own deeds that is presented here as the fear of God. To live in fear of the legal Þction and its false
doctrine (law) is to disrespect God’s Nature and Word.

Latin principles of law agree here as well, where we can read:

—=—

“If many are better led by love, more are CORRECTED by fear.”
—Si meliores sunt quos ducit amor, plures sunt quos corrigit timer. Co. Litt. 392. (BouvMaxims)

—=—

“They who fear, TAKE CARE and AVOID.”

—QUI TIMENT, CAVENT VITANT. Branch, Princ. (Black4)

—=—

“Punishment to a few, dread or fear to all.”

—Paena ad paucos, metus ad omnes. (BouvMaxims)

—=—

“That by the punishment of a few, the fear of it may affect all.”

—Ut paena ad paucos, metus ad omnes perveniat. 4 Inst. 63. (BouvMaxims)

—=—

“Those are vain fears which do not affect a man of a Þrm mind.”
—Qui non cadunt in constantem virem, vani timores sunt astinandi. 7 Co. 27. (BouvMaxims)

—=—

"Fears which do not assail a resolute man are to be accounted vain.”

—TIMORES VANI SUNT AESTIMANDI QUI NON CADUNT CONSTANTEM VIRUM. 7 Coke, 17. (Black4)

—=—

!556
And so the man that has no fear of God is the man resolute and Þrmly planted under GodÕs Nature
and Law. For he has no need to fear that which he respects without question and without lies.

Fear is used by governments through sanctions, the punishment for breaking legally imposed laws.
And yet, the whole point of fearing God is that man need not be entrapped under the legal law. To
fear God is to obey the Law of God so that no other law may effect us. To obey the legal law is to
have no fear of God, or to pretend in vain to believe (love) God while obeying another, legal god.
Our fear must be focused upon our goals, not our vices. To fear government is to take another god
before Jehovah. To fear God is to necessarily despise all things legal, which includes kings and the
idea of any sovereignty other than that place under Jehovah caused by such fear of It.

It is the English language that so purposefully misinterprets and obfuscates such words as fear,
causing men to believe (love) in the opposite meanings of so many beautiful concepts. Thus we
must, strangely enough, come to recognize this state of fear as the state of True Love in, deep
empathy for, and foremost duty to protect all things Living and Real (of Source). We must be
conscious that Þction, citizenship, membership, and artiÞce necessarily exist without (outside of)
the Source of Life and Love in respect of GodÕs Whole Nature and Law. This is the love of nothing
substantial, only form; as simulation; vanity. For fear without Love (Source) is that which the
church and state promote in their Þctions as a means of controlling men in their false personas Ñ
the fear of images and fabled monsters, yes, but especially the fear of ceremonial priests (gods)
imbued with secular, legal authority over men.

Ñ=Ñ

“Fear can make you do more wrong than hate or jealousy... fear makes
you always, always hold something back.” 


—Philip K. Dick, quoted from: ‘VALIS’

Ñ=Ñ

In other words, we should take care to avoid those things which we fear might ensnare us in pain
and trouble in the future, both with our fellow man and under GodÕs Nature. Contracts of any type
should be doubly feared, for they bind man in a Þctional surety for some performance of a future
deed as a certainty, and often stand against the True will, Law, and Love of Self of the man so
bound. Pure Love, Devotion, and Charity seek no contract, and so these should be always of manÕs
intention. That which we have no need to fear is that which we should strive to exist within. We
have no need to fear God if we only act under GodÕs Law. Thus fearing God is only the state of
mind that equals fear of all things not of (belonging to) God. And so if one who claims love seeks a
legally binding contract of marriage, if religion and government seek forced devotion to its legal
principles in membership to its corporate structure, and if charity requires corporate interests and
contractual and taxable obligations under those legal, contractual requirements, chances are that
these things should be feared and thus avoided in lieu of their Natural, equitable equivalents under
GodÕs Law. Love, Devotion, and Charity need never obtain manÕs permissive Þctions of law, and in
Reality are utterly destroyed in their True intent by such corporate, impostor systems of these
artiÞcers.

All of these systems and the tools that invoke such evil stem from one source: artiÞce. It is only in
ÒlicensedÓ anarchy of GodÕs Nature and Law thereof that evil acts may be respected and protected
in their commitment. And the governmentÕs of men are created speciÞcally for this purpose, as
institutionalized evil through legal means that are opposed to the Natural Law. It is seemingly only
through the justiÞcation and license (anarchy) of that artiÞcial legal law of men that our acts against
GodÕs Nature are conducted in artful comfort without fear. We believe in our own permissive,
governed lie that we may each act with licensed impunity against the very Supreme and
Permanence of Being that sustains us. This is in totality unreasonable.

!557
 —=—

“The safest course is to do nothing against one's conscience. With this

secret, we can enjoy life and have no fear from death.”
—Voltaire

—=—

Now let us pause here and be perfectly clear…

Throughout this journey, the author wishes for the reader to remember the key to everything
written within this work. Without the comprehension of this one concept as a foundation for all
subjects within, the reader will fail in his or her mission to see the unseen, to touch the untouchable,
and to perceive that which is not Reality. For like a computer simulation, the legal code only exists
as a script in text format (syntax) and nowhere else.

As upon your own so-called “smart” technology device (such as a cellphone), the legal code can
only exist through an application (a forced, false appearance) of that codex. And so you may down-
load a Þle with that word code, and the phone application changes those words (syntax) into a
visual re-presentation of the code, allowing your imaginary perception of something that seems
Real enough. The lie of Þction thus appears as truth. Yet, like peering into the looking glass, we still
(hopefully) perceive that what appears on the screen is nothing more than a Þctional re-presentation
of a speciÞc coded language, no matter how realistic or 3-dimensional it seems in its false
impersonation of Reality. The appearance of pictures and video (moving pictures) is simply a mass
of organized word-data; a script that can no more be viewed in Reality than the blowing wind,
requiring some artiÞcially created device to manifest its appearance. And yet, like the self-evident
yet invisibly whirling breeze, the Þction can cause much damage in Nature simply by the belief of
its user in the perceived reality of that Þction. Personhood (personiÞcation) is like an article of
invisible clothing (a law-suit) that guides the wearer in his or her actions like a puppet on strings.
The books we read may be so emotionally gripping that we may even picture those written scenes
in our minds. And yet we still know (hopefully) that these re-presentations are only Þgments of our
imagination created by mere words (code) on a page, and that our mind is changing this coded
syntax as we are reading and translating it into a chemically induced, imaginary stage-play that
does not Exist in Reality.

—=—

“ANY SUFFICIENTLY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY IS

INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC.”
—Arthor C. Clarke

—=—

Eventually, the digital voice will be indistinguishable from the Natural one, even in conversations
with machines or other technology (art). But we must never forget that similarity is not sameness.
And at this point, Reality (God) will become virtually impossible to ascertain from Þction (satan).
We will be lost in a matrix of artiÞce, a grand delusion of our own making, built only upon our
own created information (artiÞcial intelligence). Knowledge will be lost, replaced by useless form
(information). Reality will be blurred in Real time by the Þction. Men will literally become a
projected person (property of another), as their false id-entities, their very DNA is wrapped-up and
evolved within proprietary personhood. True justice then impossible, True Equity will be only a
memory.

!558
 —=—

“Because today we live in a society in which SPURIOUS REALITIES

ARE MANUFACTURED by the media, by governments, by big
corporations, by religious groups, political groups... So I ask, in my
writing, What is real? Because unceasingly we are bombarded with
pseudo-realities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very
sophisticated electronic mechanisms. I do not distrust their motives; I
distrust their power. They have a lot of it. And it is an astonishing
power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind. I ought
to know. I do the same thing.”

“There will come a time when it isn't 'They're spying on me through my

phone' anymore. Eventually, it will be 'My phone is spying on me.”
― Philip K. Dick (separate quotes)

—=—

“I see clearly that man in this world DECEIVES HIMSELF BY

ADMIRING AND ESTEEMING THINGS WHICH ARE NOT, AND
NEITHER SEES NOR ESTEEMS THE THINGS WHICH ARE.”
—St. Catherine of Genoa

—=—

“Visual imagery is the most important device incorporated into magic.”

—Satanic Bible

—=—

When the perceived miracle of ArtiÞcial Intelligence (AI) and 4-dimensional Virtual Reality (VR)
become second nature to us, as our digital self in the domain of the fourth person, will these be in
Reality anything but what they always have been: digital, Þctional words and codes being re-
presented as 3D or 4D seemingly realistic but always unreal environments, with a simulated, life-
like mathematical algorithm that pretends to answer our demands and questions with what appears
to be Real intelligence?

The answer lies in what you can be made to beLIEve (love), for a lie must be believed and consented
to in order to have an effect on Reality. Thus we have faith in government. And so above all else in
our capacity as Living sentient beings, we must always remember this one very important thingÉ

The legal language of government is based on a complete lie!

The names (via the dictionary/thesaurus) of everything upon the Earth is also a complete and utter
lie, including your own.

No, reallyÉ Government is literally a lie.

!559
 —=—

“In wartime, truth is so precious


that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.”
—Winston Churchill

—=—

The problem is not the lie itself, but the belief (love) of it by men, that the lie exists as Reality. For
only Real eyes realize real lies. Notice that the notion of Truth is personiÞed into a female ÒsheÓ in
this quote above. No, Churchill does not believe that truth is a man. He was here speaking in verse,
the language of the gods, for he was appointed legally as one. And make no mistake, for all times
to men such as these are times of war. War is peace…

HereÕs the legal deÞnition of this word lie, from various legal and other sources:

LIE - 1. (1) TO EXIST; SUBSIST: as, to "lie in grant:" said of an incorporeal right; a corporeal
right is said to Òlie in deed.Ó (2) To be maintainable, sustainable: as, an "action lies." Compare
Lay, (3) To be concealed, or in ambush: as to: lie in wait. See Lying. 2. A willful untruth ; a
falsehood. See DECEIT; Decoy; ESTOPPEL; Falsehood; FRAUD; REPRESENTATION,
Slander. (WCA1889)

LIE - noun - An untruth deliberately told; the uttering or ACTING of that which is false for
the purpose of deceiving; intentional misstatement. (Black4)

LIE - noun - 1. A criminal falsehood; a falsehood uttered FOR THE PURPOSE OF

DECEPTION; AN INTENTIONAL VIOLATION OF TRUTH. FICTION, OR A FALSE
STATEMENT OR REPRESENTATION, NOT INTENDED TO DECEIVE, MISLEAD OR
INJURE, AS IN FABLES, PARABLES AND THE LIKE, IS NOT A LIE. IT IS WILLFUL
DECEIT THAT MAKES A LIE. A man may ACT a lie as by pointing his Þnger in a wrong
direction, when a traveler inquires of him his road. 2. A FICTION; in a ludicrous sense. 3.
FALSE DOCTRINE. 1 John 2:1. 4. An idolatrous picture of God, or A FALSE GOD. Romans
1:25. 5. That which deceives and disappoints conÞdence. Micah 1:14. To give the lie TO
CHARGE WITH FALSEHOOD. A man's actions may give the lie to his words. - verb
intransitive - 1. To utter falsehood with an intention to deceive, or with an IMMORAL
DESIGN. Thou hast not lied to men, but to God. Acts 5:3. 2. To exhibit a false
representation; to say or do that which deceives another, when he has a right to know the
truth, or when morality requires a just representation. - verb intransitive preterit tense - lay; -
participle passive - lain, [LIEN, obsolete ] [The Gr. word usually signiÞes to speak, which is to
utter or throw out sounds… TO BE; to rest; TO ABIDE; TO REMAIN; often followed by
some word denoting A PARTICULAR CONDITION; as, to lie waste; to lie fallow; to lie open;
to lie hid; to lie pining or grieving; to lie under one's displeasure; TO LIE AT THE MERCY
OF A CREDITOR, or at the mercy of the waves. 8. To consist. He that thinks that diversion
may not lie in hard labor, forgets the early rising of the huntsman. 9. TO BE SUSTAINABLE
IN LAW; TO BE CAPABLE OF BEING MAINTAINED. An action lies against the tenant for
waste. An appeal lies in this case. To lie at, to tease or importune. [Little used.] To lie at the
heart, to be Þxed as an object of affection or anxious desire. 1. To lie by, to be reposited, or
REMAINING WITHÉ To lie hard or heavy, to press; TO OPPRESS; TO BURDEN. To lie on
hand, TO BE OR REMAIN IN POSSESSIONÉ 2. TO BELONG TO. It lies with you to make
amends. To lie over, to remain unpaid, after the time when payment is due; as a note in bank.
To lie to, TO BE STATIONARY, AS A SHIP. (Webs1828)

STATIONARY - adjective - 1. Fixed; not moving, progressive or regressive; not appearing to

move. The sun becomes stationary in Cancer, in its advance into the northern signs. The court
in England which was formerly itinerary, is now stationary. 2. NOT ADVANCING, IN A

!560
MORAL SENSE; not improving; NOT GROWING WISER, greater or better; not becoming
greater or more excellent. 3. Respecting place (as status and class). The same harmony and
STATIONARY CONSTITUTION… (Webs1828)

TO LIE - That which is PROPER, is Þt; as, an action on the case lies for an injury committed
without force; CORPOREAL HEREDITAMENTS LIE IN LIVERY, that is, THEY PASS BY
LIVERY; incorporeal hereditaments lie in grant, that is, pass by the force of the grant, and
WITHOUT ANY LIVERY. Vide Lying in grant. (Bouv1856)

LIE TO - To adjoin... A cottage must have had four acres of land laid to it. (Black4)

DELIVERY - Contracts. THE TRANSMITTING THE POSSESSION OF A THING FROM

ONE PERSON INTO THE POWER AND POSSESSION OF ANOTHER. 2. Originally,
delivery was a clear and unequivocal act of giving possession, accomplished by placing the
subject to be transferred in the hands of the buyer or his avowed AGENT, or in their
respective warehouses, VESSELS, carts, and the like. This delivery was properly considered
as the true BADGE of transferred property, as importing full evidence of consent to
transfer; preventing the appearance of possession in the transferrer from continuing the credit
of property unduly; and avoiding uncertainty and risk in the title of the acquirer. 3. The
complicated transactions of modern trade, however, render impossible a strict adherence to
this simple rule. It often happens that the purchaser of a commodity cannot take immediate
possession and receive the delivery… 16. - 11. If the vendor rely on the promises of the
vendee to perform the conditions of the sale, and deliver the goods accordingly, the right of
property is changed; but where, PERFORMANCE AND DELIVERY ARE UNDERSTOOD
TO BE SIMULTANEOUS, POSSESSION, OBTAINED BY ARTIFICE, WILL NOT VEST A
TITLE IN THE VENDEE. Where, on the sale of a chattel, the purchase money is paid, the
property is vested in the vendee, and if he permit it to remain in the custody of the vendor, he
cannot call upon the latter for any subsequent loss or deterioration not arising from
negligence. (Bouv1856)

LIVERY - English law. 1. The delivery of possession of lands to those tenants WHO HOLD
OF THE KING in capite, or knight's service. 2. Livery was also the name of a writ which LAY
for the heir of age, TO OBTAIN THE POSSESSION OF SEISIN OF HIS LANDS AT THE
KING'S HANDS. It signiÞes, IN THE THIRD PLACE, THE CLOTHES GIVEN BY A
NOBLEMAN OR GENTLEMAN TO HIS SERVANT. (Bouv1856)

LIVERY OF SEISIN - Estates. A delivery of possession of lands, tenements, and

hereditaments, UNTO ONE ENTITLED TO THE SAME. This was a ceremony used in the
common law for the conveyance of real estate; and the livery was in deed, which was
performed by the feoffor and the feoffee going upon the land, and the latter receiving it
from the former; or in law, where THE GAME was not made on the land, BUT IN SIGHT
OF IT. 2. In most of the states, livery of seisin is unnecessary, it having been dispensed with
either by express law or by usage. THE RECORDING OF THE DEED HAS THE SAME
EFFECT. In Maryland, however, it seems that a deed cannot operate as a feoffment, without
livery of seisin, and the article Seisin. (Bouv1856)

**More on seisin (possession by seizure) in relation to legal delivery at birth (a lie) later in this
volume.

ADJOIN - verb transitive - [Latin adjungo, ad and jungo. See Join.] TO JOIN OR UNITE TO; to
put to, BY PLACING IN CONTACT; to unite, by fastening together with a joint, mortise, or
knot. But in these transitive senses, it is rarely used. [See Join.] - verb intransitive - TO LIE or be
next to, or IN CONTACT; to be contiguous; as, a farm adjoining to the highway. This is the
common use of the word, and to is often omitted; as adjoining the highway. (Webs1828)

!561
JOIN - verb transitive - [Latin jungo, jungere; jungo for jugo, jugum; English YOKE; Gr. a yoke,
and a pair, to join] 1. To set or bring one thing in contiguity with another. Woe to them that
join house to house, that lay Þeld to Þeld. Isaiah 5:8. 2. To couple; to connect; TO COMBINE;
as, to join ideas. 3. TO UNITE IN LEAGUE OR MARRIAGE… WHAT GOD HATH JOINED
TOGETHER, LET NOT MAN PUT ASUNDER. Matthew 19:6. 4. TO ASSOCIATE. Go near
and join thyself to this chariot. Acts 8:29. 5. TO UNITE IN ANY ACT. Thy tuneful voice with
numbers join. 6. To unite in concord. But that ye be perfectly joined together IN THE SAME
MIND, AND IN THE SAME JUDGMENT. 1 Corinthians 1:10É In general, join signiÞes to
unite two entire things WITHOUT BREACH OR INTERMIXTURE, BY CONTACT OR
CONTIGUITY, either temporary or permanent. It differs from connect, which signiÞes
properly, to unite by an intermediate substance. But join, unite, and connect are often used
synonymously. - verb intransitive - To grow to; to adhere... 1. To be contiguous, close or in
contact; as WHEN TWO HOUSES JOIN. 2. To unite with in MARRIAGE, league,
CONFEDERACY, partnership or SOCIETY… (Webs1828)

LIE IN FRANCHISE - Property is said to "lie in franchise" when it is of such a nature that the
persons entitled thereto may SEIZE it without the aid of a court; e. g., wrecks, waifs, estrays.
(Black4)

LIE IN GRANT - Incorporeal hereditaments are said to "lie in grant;" that is, they pass by
force of the grant (deed or charter) WITHOUT LIVERY. (Black4)

LIE IN LIVERY - A term applied to corporeal hereditaments, freeholds, etc., signifying that
they PASS BY LIVERY, not by the mere force of the grant. (Black4)

LIE IN WAIT - See Lying in Wait. (Black4)

LYING IN WAIT - Lying in ambush; lying hid or concealed for the purpose of making a
sudden and unexpected attack upon a person WHEN HE SHALL ARRIVE AT THE SCENE
(I.E. BIRTH). In some jurisdictions, where there are several degrees of murder, lying in wait is
made evidence of that deliberation and premeditated intent which is necessary to characterize
murder in the Þrst degree. This term is not synonymous with "concealed." If a person
conceals himself for the purpose of shooting another unawares, he is lying in wait; BUT A
PERSON MAY, WHILE CONCEALED, SHOOT ANOTHER WITHOUT COMMITTING
THE CRIME OF MURDER. (Black4)

CONCEAL - To hide; secrete; withhold from the knowledge of others; to withdraw from
observation; to withhold from utterance or declaration; to cover or keep from sight. The
synonyms of conceal are "to hide: disguise, dissemble; secrete." To hide is generic: "conceal" is
simply not to make known what we wish to secrete; disguise or dissemble is TO CONCEAL
BY ASSUMING SOME FALSE APPEARANCE; to secrete is to hide in some place of
secrecy. A man may conceal facts, disguise his sentiments, dissemble his feelings, or secrete
stolen goods. The word Òconceal," according to the best lexicographers, signiÞes TO
WITHHOLD OR KEEP SECRET MENTAL FACTS FROM ANOTHER'S KNOWLEDGE, as
well as to hide or secrete physical objects from sight or observation. (Black4)

CONCEALED - Not synonymous with "lying in wait”… The term "concealed weapons"
means weapons willfully or knowingly covered or kept from sight. (Black4)

CONCEALERS - In old English law. Such as FIND out concealed LAND; that is, lands
privily (privately) kept from the king by common persons having nothing to show for them.
They are called "a troublesome, disturbant sort of men; turbulent persons.” (Black4)

CONCEALMENT - A withholding of something which one knows and which one, in duty,
is bound to reveal. The terms "misrepresentation" and "concealment" have a known and
deÞnite meaning in the law of insurance. Misrepresentation is the STATEMENT OF

!562
 SOMETHING AS FACT WHICH IS UNTRUE IN FACT, and which the assured states,
KNOWING IT TO BE NOT TRUE, WITH AN INTENT TO DECEIVE the underwriter, OR
WHICH HE STATES POSITIVELY AS TRUE, WITHOUT KNOWING IT TO BE TRUE, and
which has a tendency TO MISLEAD, such fact in either case being material to the risk.
Concealment is the designed and intentional WITHHOLDING of any fact material to the
risk, which the assured, in honesty and good faith, OUGHT TO COMMUNICATE to the
underwriter; mere silence on the part of the assured, especially as to some matter of fact
which he does not consider it important for the underwriter to know, is not to be considered
as such concealment. If the fact so untruly stated or purposely suppressed is not material, that
is, if the knowledge or ignorance of it would not naturally inßuence the judgment of the
underwriter in making the contract, or in estimating the degree and character of the risk, or in
Þxing the rate of the premium, it is not a "misrepresentation" or "concealment," within the
clause of the conditions annexed to policies. (Black4)

CONCEALMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION - To constitute it so as TO PREVENT RUNNING

OF LIMITATIONS, SOME TRICK OR ARTIFICE MUST BE EMPLOYED TO PREVENT
INQUIRY OR ELUDE INVESTIGATION, or to mislead and hinder party who has a cause of
action from obtaining information, and acts relied on must be of an AFFIRMATIVE
character and FRAUDULENT. (Black4)

LYING BY - A person who, by his PRESENCE and SILENCE at a transaction which affects
his interests, may be fairly SUPPOSED TO ACQUIESCE IN IT, if he afterwards propose to
disturb the arrangement, is said to be PREVENTED FROM DOING SO BY REASON THAT
HE HAS BEEN LYING BY. (Black4)

—=—

The constitutions of nations make the States (private People) Þctionally ÒsovereignÓ in their own
self-proclaimed, ordained and established magistracy, preventing those States (People) from being
investigated or sanctioned, protecting and preventing their secrets (mysteries) from being revealed,
making their collective (federal) and individual intent virtually undiscoverable, and creating a
paper Þction god over all who act within its incorporated jurisdictional body politic. All
constitutions are exclusive of God, even as God is listed in declaratory justiÞcation of each
constitution. For neither the scriptures nor any mention of christ are anywhere to be found in the
tainted words of these constituted governments, nor is any proclaimed obedience to them pro-
cured. There is no higher law (false doctrine) than the state. Christ (GodÕs Word) has no place and
is never named within these so-called ÒChristian Nations,Ó for this noun ÒPopeÓ is only the in-
vented form of a false title called as ÒChristÓ (replacement/antichristos) in law. Man can only
constitute (create) artiÞce. And subscription may only be taken to artiÞcial things, which need
consent and support to exist and have authority. Life in Nature needs no subscription or belief by
men to thrive. In Truth, man has no need to create anything else that GodÕs Nature and Supreme
Creation hasnÕt already provided, including the self-evidence of Its Law.

Instead, man declares, ordains, establishes, and constitutes himself as god.

—=—

“A CONSTITUTION is the arrangement of MAGISTRACIES in a

STATE.”
—Aristotle

—=—

!563
The constituted gods… One does not create a magistracy without creating subjects to that majesty at
the same time, or at least the potential to admit men into and under subjection to that godship of
magistracy. Kingdoms and nations are not built for men to be born in the issue of godship
(magistracy) without the opposite class structure being created as well. Without subjects a master
has no purpose. Without the multitude in commonalty of service, no sovereignty may exist.
Nothing can be above without that which is below it. The United States constitution, the con of the
ages, is certainly no different in its structure.

Here again, religions be damned. We need not priests and politicians to show us this Reality. For
these institutions only seek to be repositories (hoarders) of God’s abundant Nature so as to control
that abundance; to re-package and sell what is, was, and always shall be the free Gift of Jehovah.
This is the con game of the constitutionalists; seekers of pro-stitutes that will consent to live under
only what they con-stitute.

CONSTITUTION - contracts - The constitution of a contract, is the making of the contract

as, THE WRITTEN CONSTITUTION OF A DEBT. (Bouv1856)

CONSTITUTE - verb transitive - [Latin, to set.] 1. To set; TO FIX; to enact; TO ESTABLISH.

We must obey laws appointed and constituted by lawful authority, NOT AGAINST THE
LAW OF GOD. 2. TO FORM or compose; TO GIVE FORMAL EXISTENCE TO; to make a
THING what it is. Perspicuity constitutes the prime excellence of style. Truth and reason
constitute that intellectual gold that deÞes destruction. 3. To APPOINT, DEPUTE OR ELECT
to an OFFICE or employment; TO MAKE AND EMPOWER. A sheriff is constituted a
conservator of the peace. A has constituted B his ATTORNEY or AGENT. (Webs1828)

CON - …1. To know. 2. TO MAKE ONESELF MASTER OF; TO FIX IN THE MIND or
commit to memory… (Webs1828)

STITCH - verb transitive - [G. This is another form of STICK.] 1. To sew in a particular
manner… to stitch the leaves of a book and form a pamphlet. 2. To form land into ridges. [N.
England.] To stitch up, to mend or UNITE with a needle and thread; as, TO STITCH UP A
RENT; to stitch up an artery. - noun - É3. A LAND; the space between two double furrows in
plowed ground. (Webs1828)

STICK - noun - [G. This word is connected with the verb to stick with STOCK, stack, and
other words having the like elements. The primary sense of the root is to thrust, to shoot, and
to set.]… - verb transitive preterit tense and participle passive - stuck. [G., to sting or prick, to stick
TO ADHERE.] 1. To pierce; to stab; TO CAUSE TO ENTER, as a pointed instrument; hence,
to kill by piercing; as, to stick a beast in slaughter. [A common use of the word.] 2. To thrust
in; to fasten or CAUSE TO REMAIN by piercing; as, to stick a pin on the sleeve… - verb
intransitive - …2. TO BE UNITED; TO BE INSEPARABLE; TO CLING FAST TO, AS
SOMETHING REPROACHFUL… 4. To stop; to be impeded by ADHESION or obstruction;
as, the carriage sticks in the mire. 5. To stop; to be ARRESTED IN A COURSE…11. To adhere
closely in friendship and affection. There is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.
Proverbs 18:24. To stick to, to adhere closely; to be constant; TO BE FIRM; to be persevering;
as, to stick to a party or cause… To stick by, 1. To adhere closely; to be constant; TO BE FIRM
IN SUPPORTING. We are your only friends; stick by us, and we will stick by you. 2. To be
troublesome by adhering… (Webs1828)

TUTELAR, TUTELARY - adjective - [Latin tutelaris, supra.] HAVING THE GUARDIANSHIP

OR CHARGE OF PROTECTING A PERSON OR A THING; guardian; protecting; as
tutelary genii; tutelary goddesses. (Webs1828)

TUTELAGE - noun - [from Latin tutela, PROTECTION, from tueor, to defend.] 1.

Guardianship; protection; applied to the person protecting; as, THE KING'S RIGHT OF
SEIGNORY AND TUTELAGE. 2. STATE OF BEING UNDER A GUARDIAN. (Webs1828)

!564
 TUTOR - noun - [Latin from tuero, TO DEFEND.] 1. In the civil law, A GUARDIAN; ONE
WHO HAS THE CHARGE OF A CHILD OR PUPIL AND HIS ESTATE. 2. One who has the
care of instructing another in various branches or in any branch of human learning… - verb
transitive - To teach; to instruct. 1. TO TREAT WITH AUTHORITY OR SEVERITY. 2. To
correct. (Webs1828)

TUTORAGE - noun - In the civil law, guardianship; THE CHARGE OF A PUPIL AND HIS
ESTATE. In France, tutorage does not expire till the pupil is twenty Þve years of age. 1. The
AUTHORITY OR SOLEMNITY OF A TUTOR. [Little used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

And just what happens when we put the words con, stitch, and tutelary together?

Constitution…

We get the con-sti-tuted legal existence in debt called citizen-ship in agency, as the idolatry and
adultery of being a constituent; a moving statue, a legally created and automated golem. Just why
did you think public education is mandatory? It’s a contractual requirement (debt) of the consti-
tutors!

Amazingly, anyone who sees through this piracy scheme of constitutions and the magistracy
thereby falsely created from it is considered as mentally ill. Merely disagreeing with the gods and
attempting to be Naturally Free when in an assumed public contract of servitude is a psychiatric
condition treatable by pain, punishment, extortion (exaction), and other methods of tyranny.
Conformity to legalism, false logic (dialectic), public-mindedness, and of course abandonment of
True religious Freedom under God and Natural Law is a requirement of these constituted
authorities. Those who are awake to the fraud obviously then have the following diagnosis:

CONSTITUTIONAL PSYCHOPATHIC INFERIORITY - Individuals who show a lifelong

and constitutional TENDENCY NOT TO CONFORM TO THE CUSTOMS OF THE
GROUP, and who HABITUALLY MISBEHAVE, and have no sense of responsibility to their
fellowmen or to society as a whole. These individuals fail to learn by experience and are
inadequate, incompatible, and inefÞcient. (Black4)

—=—

The conformers, the public-minded, brainwashed pat-riots as lovers of their own enslavement, that
common class of equalized house-slaves called the general public, the middle class of mammon,
the goyim we are all trained to become from birth; these are the constitutors, the constituents, the
honored dead absent of spirit and Living only a civil, artiÞcial existence.

CONSTITUENT - adjective - [Latin, to set. See STATUE, STATUTE.] Setting; constituting;

applied to PARTS OF A THING THAT ARE ESSENTIAL TO IT. Hence, necessary or
essential; elemental; forming, composing or making as an essential part. BODY, SOUL, AND
REASON, ARE THE THREE CONSTITUENT PARTS OF A MAN. Oxygen and hydrogen are
the constituent parts of water. (Webs1828)

CONSTITUENT - noun - 1. He or THAT WHICH SETS, FIXES OR FORMS; HE OR THAT

WHICH CONSTITUTES OR COMPOSES. Their Þrst composure and origination requires a
higher and nobler constituent than chance. 2. THAT WHICH CONSTITUTES OR
COMPOSES, as a part, or an essential part. The lymph in those glands is a necessary
constituent of the aliment. 3. ONE WHO APPOINTS OR ELECTS ANOTHER to an ofÞce or
employment. (Webs1828)

!565
CONSTITUENT - He who GIVES AUTHORITY TO ANOTHER TO ACT FOR HIM. THE
CONSTITUENT IS BOUND WITH WHATEVER HIS ATTORNEY (AGENT) DOES BY
VIRTUE OF HIS AUTHORITY. The electors of a member of the legislature are his
constituents, to whom HE IS RESPONSIBLE for his legislative acts. (Bouv1856)

STATUE - noun - [Latin, to set; that which is SET OR FIXED.] AN IMAGE; a solid substance
formed by carving into the likeness of a whole living being; as a statue of Hercules or of a
lion. - verb transitive - TO PLACE, as a statue; TO FORM A STATUE OF. (Webs1828)

CONSTITUTED - participle passive - SET; FIXED; ESTABLISHED; made; ELECTED;

APPOINTED. (Webs1828)

CONSTITUTED - In the civil law. AN AGREEMENT TO PAY A SUBSISTING DEBT which

exists without any stipulation, whether of the promisor OR ANOTHER PARTY. It differs
from a stipulation in that it must be for an EXISTING debt. A day appointed for any
purpose. A form of APPEAL. Calvinus, Lex. (Black4)

CONSTITUTER - noun - One who constitutes or appoints. (Webs1828)

CONSTITUTOR - In the civil law. One who, by a simple agreement, BECOMES

RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PAYMENT OF ANOTHER'S DEBT. Inst. 4, 6, 9. (Black4)

CONSTITUTOR - Civil law. He who promised by a simple pact TO PAY THE DEBT OF
ANOTHER; and this is always A PRINCIPAL OBLIGATION. (Bouv1856)

CONSTITUTION - (repeated) - Contracts. The constitution of a contract, is the making of the

contract as, THE WRITTEN CONSTITUTION OF A DEBT. (Bouv1856)

CONSTITUTIONES - Laws promulgated, i. e., ENACTED, by the ROMAN EMPEROR.

They were of various kinds, namely, the following: (1) Edicta; (2) decreta; (3) rescripta, called also
"epistolae." Sometimes they were GENERAL, and intended TO FORM A PRECEDENT FOR
OTHER LIKE CASES; at other times they were SPECIAL, particular, or individual
(personales), and not intended to form a precedent. The emperor had this POWER OF
IRRESPONSIBLE ENACTMENT by virtue of a certain lex regia, whereby he was made the
fountain of justice and of mercy. (Black4)

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - (1) That branch of the PUBLIC LAW OF A STATE which treats
of the organization and frame of government, THE ORGANS AND POWERS OF
SOVEREIGNTY, the distribution of political and governmental AUTHORITIES AND
FUNCTIONS, the fundamental PRINCIPLES which are TO REGULATE THE RELATIONS
OF GOVERNMENT AND SUBJECT, and which PRESCRIBES generally the plan and
method according to which the public affairs of the state are to be ADMINISTERED. (2)
That department of the science of law which treats of constitutions, their establishment,
construction, and interpretation, and of the validity of legal enactments as tested by the
criterion of conformity to the fundamental law. (3) A constitutional law is one which is
consonant to, and agrees with, the constitution; ONE WHICH IS NOT IN VIOLATION OF
ANY PROVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PARTICULAR STATE. (Black4)

SUBJECT - … - noun - [Latin] 1. ONE THAT OWES ALLEGIANCE TO A SOVEREIGN AND

IS GOVERNED BY HIS LAWS. The NATIVES of Great Britain are subjects of the British
government. THE NATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, AND NATURALIZED
FOREIGNERS, ARE SUBJECTS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Men in FREE
governments, ARE SUBJECTS AS WELL AS CITIZENS; AS CITIZENS, THEY ENJOY
RIGHTS AND FRANCHISES; as subjects, they are BOUND to obey the laws. THE
SUBJECT MUST OBEY HIS PRINCE, BECAUSE GOD COMMANDS IT, AND HUMAN
LAWS REQUIRE IT… 4. That in which any thing inheres or EXISTS… - verb transitive - 1. To

!566
 bring under the power or DOMINION of. Alexander subjected a great part of the civilized
world to his dominion. Firmness of mind that subjects every gratiÞcation of sense to the rule
of right reason— 2. TO PUT UNDER OR WITHIN THE POWER OF. In one short view
subjected to our eye, gods, emperors, heroes, sages, beauties lie. 3. TO ENSLAVE; to make
obnoxious. He is the most subjected, the most enslaved, WHO IS SO IN HIS
UNDERSTANDING. 4. To expose; to make liable. Credulity subjects a person to impositions.
5. To submit; to make accountable. God is not bound to subject his ways of operation to the
scrutiny of our thoughts— 6. To make subservient. --Subjected to his service angel wings. 7.
To cause to undergo; as, to subject a substance to a white heat; to subject it to a rigid test.
(Webs1828)

CONSTAT - English law. The name of a CERTIFICATE, which the clerk of the pipe and
auditors of the exchequer make at the request of any person who intends to plead or move in
the court for the discharge of anything; and the effect of it is, the certifying what constat
(APPEARS) upon record touching the matter in question. 2. A constat is held to be superior
to an ordinary certiÞcate, because IT CONTAINS NOTHING BUT WHAT IS ON RECORD.
AN EXEMPLIFICATION UNDER THE GREAT SEAL, OF THE ENROLMENT OF ANY
LETTERS-PATENT, is called a constat. Vide ExempliÞcation; Inspeximus. 3. Whenever an
ofÞcer gives a CERTIFICATE that such A THING APPEARS OF RECORD, it is called a
constat; BECAUSE THE OFFICER DOES NOT SAY THAT THE FACT IS SO, BUT IT
APPEARS TO BE AS HE CERTIFIES. A certiÞcate that it appears to the ofÞcer that a
judgment has been entered, is insufÞcient. (Bouv1856)

—=—

The constituted, principal authorities and the subjected agents… which one do you really think you
are?

The Sealed birth certiÞcate is constat (an ofÞcial appearance) of the recorded deed (event) of the
creation (birth) of a legal entity; a strawman. Thus, our legal self is publicly constituted (legally
created) as a registered debtor, and so too are we pre-tended to be as acting agent in surety, as we
play that Þctional part throughout our lives by our expressions of actions taken through its ad-
mixed surname and signature. The court hardly need prove the fact of our appearance in person
there, for we foolishly present a false id-entity such as a driverÕs license that certiÞes our legal
existence and apparition in that courtroom at bar. To enter into and be heard in their cartoon world,
we must admit to being a cartoon or to being its agent (attorney) answering a service of summons
and process, the agent being a sort of bridge between worlds, able to speak not as but on behalf of
the dead Þctional character displayed by that legal persona (mask).

Let us never forget that the original United States of America were nothing if not slave colonies,
that the constitution protected and promoted slavery, and that those colonies were then constituted
(put into debt compact) as slave-states. This alone separates the constitution instantly from God’s
Law. No rational man can possibly think that slavery is christ-like. Thus no man should be fooled
into believing in the notion of the possibility of a “Christian nation” as being at all in harmony with
christ’s scriptural teachings, only as one in harmony with the corporate church. For slaves were
listed not just as valuable considerations, but in the lowest status as 3/5’s of a person only for
taxation purposes as valuable property in mammon. They were not men but beasts personiÞed and
chained. And yet the most avid supporter and lover of this country places the legal constitution
above the Bible, praising its legal re-creation as the end of involuntary slavery instead of its true
intent: the inception of voluntary slavery and servitude we know today as US Citizenship.

At least the negroes and white indentures (white negro) knew they were slaves…

!567
 —=—

"How is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers
of negroes?”


—Samuel Johnson, quoted from: ‘Taxation No Tyranny - An Answer To The Resolutions And Address Of The American Congress.’

—=—

“For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only USE NOT
LIBERTY FOR AN OCCASION TO THE FLESH, BUT BY LOVE SERVE
ONE ANOTHER.”
—Galatians 5:13, KJB

—=—

We hardly stop to consider that the constitution positively gave certain men liberty to own other
certain men as slaves. We often confuse liberty and freedom as total Freedom without constraint,
without pausing to consider those Laws of God’s Nature that abound, creating the duties we owe
to all others in such a Natural Liberty. And so we forget the Source (God) of Natural liberty and
Law, and instead receive legalized liberty (corporate franchise) from these constituted slave-master
authorities, from a false legal source of constituted magistracy.

MAYOR - The chief or EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE OF A CITY. His PRINCIPAL DUTY is

to enforce the laws of the city. He may also preside over the mayor's court, which has
JURISDICTION, concurrent with the courts of other committing magistrates, over offenses
perpetrated WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, and of special matters GIVEN BY STATUTE. See
MAGISTRATE. (WCA1889)

LOCAL GOVERNMENT; MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT - See CORPORATION, Municipal.

(WCA1889)

—=—

A city and a county are never anything but a municipal corporation. The term of art “city limits” is
often, in many states, listed instead as “corporate limits.” To place any other image or respect upon
any city other than this fact is to be fallen to Þction, to be romanticized by artiÞce and artful
reputation. A city simply does not Exist. Its existence is in legal name (noun) only, consisting of a
corporate charter and agencies Þlled by agents. The mayor is the chief magistrate (god) of any city
or county (corporation). And so the imaginary notion of The Windy City is still in Reality just a
Þctional piece of paper; a constituted commercial corporation and nothing more, though its name is
used to describe attributes of things that are not “the city.” To leave the city is to leave (stop
believing in/loving) the corporate jurisdiction of that city, not necessarily the actual land it claims
to legally, corporately control. For all parts of the United States have been districted (seized) into
counties (municipal corporations), and so to leave the cities or counties would be legally
impossible. We can only remain unseen and disrespected to their Þctional laws and jurisdictions by
following our own spiritual path under the Higher Law. We must distinguish between the Real and
the Þction, especially when it involves the condition of our Self and how we are ÒseenÓ by the
agents of law.



This word “election” is also strewn throughout the Bible. We should recognize that election is
merely another word for choice. We have a choice between God and mammon, Reality and Þction,
and our election makes that choice sure. In the induced legal, vulgar realm of dog-Latin, we do not
comprehend that our legal elections represent the corporate franchise of voting for our constitutors,

!568
as constituted authorities, to which we become the constituents and subjects thereof. It is the
participation in this so-called patriotic endeavor of voting for rulers that ultimately legitimizes that
which seals our spiritual fate. For by participation in legal elections, Jehovah is never our choice.
The elected legal gods Þctionally destroy manÕs power of choice to act morally against such artiÞce
as themselves in ßattering title through their legal (evil) design of that false doctrine of Òfreedom of
religionÓ deÞned previously in this chapter. To vote is to consent and submit to Þctional authority
and the punishments (sanctions) of the false law and executive agents that enforce that imagined
color of authority.

—=—

“Even so then at this present time also THERE IS A REMNANT

ACCORDING TO THE ELECTION OF GRACE.”
—Romans 11: 5, KJB

—=—

“Knowing, brethren beloved, your ELECTION of God.”

—1 Thessalonians 1: 4, KJB

—=—

“Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to MAKE YOUR

CALLING AND ELECTION SURE: for if ye do these things, YE SHALL
NEVER FALL: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you
abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ. Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in
remembrance of these things, though ye know them, AND BE
ESTABLISHED IN THE PRESENT TRUTH.”
—2 Peter 1: 10-12, KJB

—=—

And here we must pause to consider that our common idea of what Existence is in Reality and in
Nature has no bearing or sameness in the legal Þction. A lie is never the present Truth of Life in
GodÕs Nature. For to exist as a Þction is to be created by legal means, a conÞrmed untruth, an
image, a Þctional creation of manÕs i-magi-nation, and at best a simulation of what Is. So we must
herein comprehend that a legal existence is in-deed a lie which is respected despite God. Anything
and everything that exists and appears in legal form (in name and title) is a lie. But most importantly,
a legal existence as a Þction only has artiÞcial life as long as men can be con-vinced to acknowledge
and conÞrm that legal life as anything but a lie. Belief (love) and faith in the lie by men christens the
lie as a virtual reality, creating the legal existence of that which does not Exist in Nature, allowing
false gods (magistrates) to rule in a falsehood of authority and law, under the dark robes of a God-
less justice system.

Now let us hear from the fabled ÒfatherÓ of the declaration of independence himself, to whom the
phrase Òseparation of church and stateÓ originated in America. But we never stop to think that a
nation or people free from religion is a nation and a people without a Higher, moral, foundational
Law. To be free of religion is to be without religious Law. It means to be morally Lawless, and that
the legal law of man is respected as the highest in our voluntary dam-nation.

!569
 —=—

“The bill for establishing religious freedom… still met with opposition;
but, WITH SOME MUTILATIONS IN THE PREAMBLE, it was Þnally
passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion
was meant to be UNIVERSAL. Where the preamble declares that
coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion,
an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word ‘Jesus Christ,’ SO
THAT IT SHOULD READ ‘A DEPARTURE FROM THE PLAN OF
JESUS CHRIST, THE HOLY AUTHOR OF OUR RELIGION.’ THE
INSERTION WAS REJECTED BY A GREAT MAJORITY, in proof that
they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew
and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and inÞdel
OF EVERY DENOMINATION.”
—Thomas Jefferson, from his autobiography, in reference to the 1786 Virginia Act for Establishing Religious Freedom, a template for the First Amendment

—=—

ÒAnd the day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the
supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed
with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.”
—Thomas Jefferson, famously quoted in observation to John Adams

—=—

“The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts ONLY as are

injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say
there are twenty gods, OR NO GOD. It neither picks my pocket nor
breaks my leg.Ó
—Thomas Jefferson, excerpt from: ‘Notes on the State of Virginia’

—=—

Many attempts are documented in the past to “christianize” the constitution of the United States,
yet another obvious hint that there is nothing of christ (God’s Word/Law) within. One example of
this came in 1864 during the American Civil War, when the National Association for the
Amendment of the Constitution, renamed later as the National Reform Association (NRA),
attempted desperately to constitutionally amend what it called as the “atheistical Constitution” by
clearly declaring it as a “Christian Nation.” To this end, the preamble to the constitution was
proposed to be changed to this:

—=—

ÒWe, the people of the United States, humbly acknowledging Almighty

God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, THE

!570
 LORD JESUS CHRIST AS THE RULER AMONG THE NATIONS, HIS
REVEALED WILL AS THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, IN ORDER
TO CONSTITUTE A CHRISTIAN GOVERNMENT… do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the United States of America”

—=—

Needless to say this amendment was defeated utterly by congress. This would have severely tied
the hands of these commercial pirates as the principal money-changers and tax-farmers, and would
have taken away their commercial intent (corporate personhood). The preamble is a statement of
purpose, which is why only it was attempted to be changed. It is a preface, not dissimilar in
purpose to the one in this work, describing the author’s intentions. For the founders of this
incorporated structure based it purely in mammon, even as the preamble’s words exclaim well-
being only for “Themselves (Ourselves) and their Posterity (bloodline),” and nothing could be
farther from the True tenets, will, and testament of christ. Obviously the constitutions are respecters
of legal (anti-God) persons, places, and things (legal terms of art). Instead, the constitution created
a state of being that allowed private men to do unto others as they should not want us to do to
them, and in turn created a structure of pure competition opposed to Real Love, Faith, Charity, and
Piety.

The preamble establishes the fact that men as human capital (chattel) must be moved by the
commercial law and systems of mammon. It established masters and servants as principals and
agents, creating protective statuses (persons) for each class while calling it, including the shackled
slave-class, as the legal “equality” of their own Manifest Destiny. It ordained false gods and
established their followers.

PREAMBLE - noun - [Latin proe, before, and ambulo, to go.] 1. Something previous;
introduction to a discourse or writing. 2. The introductory part of a statute, which states
THE REASONS AND INTENT OF THE LAW. - verb transitive - To preface; to introduce with
previous remarks. (Webs1828)

AMBLE - verb intransitive - [Latin ambulo, to walk.] 1. To move with a certain peculiar pace, as
a horse, Þrst lifting his two legs on one side, and then changing to the other. 2. To move easy,
without hard shocks. Him time ambles withal. 3. In a ludicrous sense, TO MOVE WITH
SUBMISSION, OR BY DIRECTION, OR TO MOVE AFFECTEDLY. - noun - A peculiar pace
of a horse. (Webs1828)

—=—

Slaves and subjects in indenture must be ambled in their employments (use), and so the
constitution intentionally created the foundation of the ultimate colony (plantation) as a nation of
States, negatively protecting the masters of those States (People) from their positively enforced
ambling and farming of all other men and public taxes. A colony is another word for a farm, a
plantation, which is why a tax collector was nicknamed as a farmer of men. What is negatively
restricted in the constitution towards those private States (People) leaves all positive, non-
restrictive (unconstitutional) principles of public law to effect all the positively created subjects
(legal entities) of the nation in the public realm of jurisdiction. They are to be moved with sub-
mission and by causal misdirection, a commercial system designed to move those affected (legally
dis-eased) men by controlling the law and thus ability and freedom of movement while acting in
public statuses (commercial vessels). How else might slaves have been made “equal” denizens to
other US citizenships after the Civil War unless all other public US persons were made equally
enslaved (enfranchised) as well? We all were made to meet somewhere in the middle, just as the
deÞnition of denizen suggests, unable to inherit land but more than able to rent it publicly in
tenancy from its private, feudal holder, even while being tricked into believing it is our own.

!571
Other examples of the utter dismissal of christ’s testament and Law (Word) in the constitution, as
provided from an article collated by an “atheist” website entitled patheos.com — listed and detailed
not the words of atheists but of ardent religious opponents and reformers to the constitution — are
here listed and sourced as follows:

An anonymous anti-federalist writer in October 1787 complained about the Constitution’s

“general disregard of religion” and “indifference towards religion;” in November another
opponent of the Constitution who went by the pen name Philadelphiensis echoed these
complaints, criticizing its “silence” and “indifference about religion” in November 1787.
(Kramnick, Isaac and R. Laurence Moore. The Godless Constitution: The Case Against Religious
Correctness. W.W. Norton, 1996, page 33, and continued…)

In January of 1788, an anti-federalist warned in a Boston newspaper that since God was
absent from the Constitution, America would suffer the curse pronounced by Samuel in 1
Samuel 15:23 (“BECAUSE THOU HAST REJECTED THE WORD OF THE LORD, HE
HATH ALSO REJECTED THEE”). A March 1788 letter to the Massachusetts Gazette
similarly criticized the Constitution’s “inattention” to religion and asserted that it would be
impossible to establish an enduring government without “publick protection” for
religious belief. (page 36)

In 1789, a group of Presbyterian elders wrote to George Washington to complain that the
Constitution contained no reference to “the only true God and Jesus Christ, who he hath
sent.” (page 102)

In 1811, Rev. Samuel Austin, later to be president of the University of Vermont, claimed that
the Constitution’s “one capital defect” was that it was “ENTIRELY DISCONNECTED
FROM CHRISTIANITY.” (page 144)

In 1812, Rev. Timothy Dwight, the president of Yale and grandson of the infamous Þre-and-
brimstone preacher Jonathan Edwards, lamented that America had “offended Providence”
by forming a Constitution “WITHOUT ANY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF GOD; without
any recognition of His [sic] mercies to us, AS A PEOPLE, of His government, OR EVEN
OF HIS EXISTENCE… Thus we commenced our NATIONAL EXISTENCE under the
present system, WITHOUT GOD.” (page 105)

The president of Transylvania University, a Kentucky Presbyterian clergyman, in 1815

publicly deplored the fact that NOWHERE IN THE CONSTITUTION WAS “GOD THE
SAVIOR RECOGNIZED.” (page 144)

The chaplain of the New York State legislature in 1820 denounced the founders for their
“ingratitude… without parallel” in writing a Constitution “in which there is NOT THE
SLIGHTEST HINT OF HOMAGE TO THE GOD OF HEAVEN.” (page 144)

Dr. John Mason, a New York clergyman, protested in 1793 that “from the Constitution of
the United States, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ASCERTAIN WHAT GOD WE WORSHIP, OR
WHETHER WE OWN A GOD AT ALL” (p.144), and that this was “an omission which no
pretext whatever can palliate.” (Jacoby, Susan. Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism.
Metropolitan Books, 2004, page 30)

—=—

It is again important to distinguish the intent of these words, whereas the notion of a church being
that of a religious People is quite different from that of an incorporated church established by the
legal, corporate Þction state. One is an extended family (verb) of spiritually like-minded, Self-
governing men, one is an artiÞcial person (corporation) with a necessarily opposing doctrine
towards the scriptures. There is simply no need to form an artiÞcial ÒchurchÓ (noun) of the legal
state (person in law) when the actual State (People) is the Real church (verb).

!572
At this point, the True Nature of what a church is should be clear in the mind of the reader, and this
notion of separation of church and state should be coming into focus as the very exclusion of
moral, religious Law from legal, civil law. It is law without a solid, True foundation. Commerce, as
the exclusive interest of mammon, simply cannot exist in harmony with the tenants taught in christ.
Therefore in no way can even the possibility of any nation (legal state) being founded upon those of
christ’s teachings be considered, except by the self-interested antichrists as both masters and
servants thereof; those principals and agents of the nations of mammon themselves. The title
(noun) does not make the man (verb). The name and denomination (noun) does not represent the
actions (verbs) of men. For only persons and not men live by the misguided commercial course of a
legal, spiritual death in any nation.

We culturally and without conscious awareness repeat the colloquialism that satan is the king of lies.
Translated, this simply means that evil is the false re-presentation of all of Reality by that which is
adversarial (satanic) to God’s Nature of what is self-evidently True and self-Existent. If lies are
abhorrent to Reality, then all lies can only be abhorrent to God, for Jehovah (verb) is nothing if not
the Pure and utter essence of the Truth of the currently Existing Reality. To anthropomorphize God
into the human form or of anything other than what is the self-evident Truth of the Nature of all
Creation is to adhere to man’s false doctrines of church and state. It is to turn God into an
institutionalized lie. For man should take no graven images and have no gods before the One True
God. No nouns before the Verb! There are no snapshots or selÞes of God on Facebook, for no
camera or other artiÞce of man could possibly capture the fullness of God in any way, shape, Glory,
substance, Truth, or form. All church-created images of God are a lie. All conceptualizations of God
by men, no matter how sincere in their intent, are merely forms of the art of imagination and
imagery, misrepresentation and subterfuge. For to mix any artiÞcial form in re-presentation of any
True substance is the very deÞnition of adultery. And to believe in (love) that art over the Reality it
re-presents is the True and fundamental foundation of all sin (syn).

Satan is purely manÕs creation, a personiÞcation of evil (artiÞce), just as christ is the personiÞcation
of the Truth and Law of God’s Nature. For in all of Creation, in all of Nature, only man seems to
have the capacity to lie even unto and about his own Self. No other Living or non-Living part of
Nature (Creation) pretends to Exist by and under conÞrmed and believed-in lies as man does. For
the artful existence of man’s power and authority over others can only exist if men believe in (love)
and choose the great delusion of the big lie to be a replacement for Reality (self-evident Truth).
Those who are in power must brainwash those under their own constituted, established, and
ordained false-sovereign existence to love that which they should not, to respect that which they
should defame, and to co-exist with that which they should shun.

From evil’s perspective, existence (artiÞce) can only be accomplished through deception in artful
design. The existence of evil lives through the legal lies of foolish men, as does the church and state.

EXIST - To live; to have life or animation; to be in present force, activity, or effect at a given
time; as in speaking of "EXISTING" CONTRACTS, CREDITORS, DEBTS, LAWS, RIGHTS,
or LIENS. To be or continue to be. See, also, Existing. (Black4)

EXISTING - The force of this word is not necessarily conÞned to the present. (Black4)

EXISTENCE - As applied to WILL means physical existence. (Black4)

EXISTIMATIO - In the civil law. THE CIVIL REPUTATION WHICH BELONGED TO THE
ROMAN CITIZEN, as such. Called A STATE OR CONDITION of unimpeached dignity or
CHARACTER, (dignitatis inlaesae status;) the highest STANDING of a Roman CITIZEN. Also
the decision or award of an arbiter. (Black4)

PHYSICAL - Relating or pertaining to the body, as distinguished from the mind or soul or
the emotions; material, substantive, HAVING AN OBJECTIVE EXISTENCE, AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM IMAGINARY OR FICTITIOUS; REAL, HAVING RELATION
TO FACTS, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM MORAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE. (Black4)

!573
 PHYSICAL FACT - In the law of evidence. A fact having a physical existence, AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM A MERE CONCEPTION OF THE MIND; one which is visible,
audible, or palpable; such as the sound of a pistol shot, a man running, impressions of human
feet on the ground. A fact considered to have its seat IN SOME INANIMATE BEING, or, if
in an animate being, by virtue, not of the qualities by which IT IS CONSTITUTED
ANIMATE, but of those which it has IN COMMON WITH THE CLASS OF INANIMATE
BEINGS. (Black4)

—=—

Here we must designate the so-called factualness of legal things. For Þctions can in-deed legally
(adversarially) exist as “actual” facts, as long as we all agree that a lie is a fact according to law. But
remember, all facts are lies, for all things legal are a lie made purely of artful words. Legal facts are
only terms of art describing Real or artiÞcial things. For instance, the ÒeventÓ of our strawman's
birth is a legal fact that creates a legal entity, all of which is made of certiÞed words. Its existence is
thus a ÒfactÓ in law, as is our surety to it by our express use of its status and signature. In other
words, we cause the Þction to be fact.

—=—

FACT -vs- LAW

“A fact is either a STATE of things, that is, AN EXISTENCE, or a

MOTION, that is, AN EVENT…”

“Fact” is very frequently used in OPPOSITION OR CONTRAST to “law.”



“Thus, questions of fact are for the JURY; questions of law for the COURT.”

“SO AN ATTORNEY AT LAW IS AN OFFICER OF THE COURTS of

justice: an attorney in fact is APPOINTED by the written authorization
OF A PRINCIPAL to manage business affairs usually not professional.”

“Law is a PRINCIPLE; fact is an EVENT. Law is CONCEIVED; fact is

ACTUAL. Law is a rule of DUTY: fact is that which has been according to
or in contravention of the RULE. The distinction is well illustrated in the
rule that THE EXISTENCE OF FOREIGN LAWS IS MATTER OF FACT.
Within the territory of its jurisdiction, LAW OPERATES AS AN
OBLIGATORY RULE WHICH JUDGES MUST RECOGNIZE AND
ENFORCE; but, in a tribunal OUTSIDE THAT JURISDICTION, IT
LOSES ITS OBLIGATORY FORCE AND ITS CLAIM TO JUDICIAL
NOTICE. THE FACT THAT IT EXISTS, if important to the rights of
parties, MUST BE ALLEGED AND PROVED THE SAME AS THE
ACTUAL EXISTENCE OF ANY OTHER INSTITUTION.”
DeÞnition of Ôfact,Õ 1 Benth. Jud. Ev. 48. and Abbott. (Black4)

—=—

!574
Here again we see the simple rule of Nature: that which needs proven to exist is not of Jehovah, and
that which exists by proof as ÒfactÓ is always but a conÞrmed and acknowledged lie.

A US citizen-ship is a fact Ñ a man representing by his conÞrmed and consensual agency a

publicly registered (published) event (persona), a legal entity created by its positive legal birth. This
is to say that a US citizen-ship (public persona) is not considered to be conceived legitimately by
law. Fraud is legally allowed even by the corrupted maxims of law as long as it is agreed upon in
contract, contented to, and acted within without avoidance. In other words, like the creation of any
corporation, a citizen-ship has no blood consideration, for it is not Real. Thus the law may lawfully
recognize no inheritable blood, for blood does not ßow within a Þction of law. No blood, no heir,
and so no inheritanceÉ We know we are considered in public attainder, without blood right,
simply because we must create an artiÞcial, legal will, for the law recognizes no inheritable blood
in public persons of the United States. The will and inheritance of every man is self-evident, being
that of his closest kin, while the will of every legal person must be legally established and
approved by the creator gods of all Þctional persons (legal statuses). This one distinguishing fact
must be comprehended so that the sin (synthesis) of impersonation in Þction is not confused with
the spirit of Life. The will of persons is a Þction not automatically recognized by law, for all the
issues (children) of legal persons are Þctions of law (legal recreations per the state/district). The
law (including those of the constitution) only protects the negative rights and duties of private
men, not public persons. The person exists only in and under the terms of positive law, is created by
positive law, and is governed only under positive law. It simply has no will of its own, and thus its
agent (the subjected man in legally bound surety of a public citizen-ship) must positively create the
will of that positively created (birthed) person. Without a will, the persons estate will be divided by
the state and likely extorted (taxed) to its advantage, for all the property of the person already
belongs to the state as the creator and administrator of it.

As legal, commercially registered agents we are acting as attorney’s in fact (agents) for our public
person’s principal owner (United States), re-presented by its own agencies and agents thereof,
which in turn are attorney’s at law and thus agents of the court. This imaginary fact of legal
existence is called citizen-ship, where we conduct ourselves in mammon as commercial persons
under that law of agency in international admiralty, maritime law. This is also known as the law of
merchants (law merchant), under which we are acting in the capacity of merchants upon this
Þctional (legal) sea of commerce, in virtual ships called public citizens. Thus we have artiÞcial
beneÞts such as consumer protections, insurance, public tender, and security from our principal
(United States) in all of our interstate commercial transactions, and therefore we also must suffer
the reciprocal obligations in servitude to that principal for our use of its commercial entity (person/
ship) and its beneÞts in the form of duties, taxes, rents, pain, punishment, exaction (extortion) and
other such ÒrightsÓ of United States citizenship (in agency). No beneÞt ever comes without an
obligation, and no debtor can exist without a creditor. A debtor must have a trackable and traceable
id-entity. Nothing legal is Naturally Free, for legal things exist only politically as a limited liberty.
Politically, legal things are always a patented lie and the word free means only to act in the franchise
of a principal corporation, which is called as the law of agency.

We are considered objectively as mere things; marked beasts of burden; as agents (factors) which
serve no other purpose than to beneÞt our principal master in surety, the god that is sovereign
government. We are only men of straw, cartoons, Þctions, mere ghosts of the men we were born
under God’s Nature to Be, and therefore transparent to the state in consideration of our God-given
rights. We must know that sinners (men acting as legal persons in artiÞce) have no beneÞt of the
Natural Law, for Þctional persons are only judged by other Þctionally titled persons of man as
property, not as men of God. One cannot judge a Þctional person a (mask) as part of GodÕs Nature
and Creation. To act as something we are not is the actual sin (fact/event). Legal Þction is the realm
and language of sin (syn). GodÕs Higher Law is nowhere to be found within the courts of the 

i-magi-nations of men. And no man can appear in legal Þction unless he accepts the legal persona
of manÕs sinful (synthetic) design of artiÞce allocated to him in surety.

We lay (lie) with the devils (evil geniuses) that are our legal lords and masters.

!575
OBJECT - noun - End aimed at, the thing sought to be accomplished, the aim or purpose, the
thing sought to be ATTAINED. Anything which comes within the cognizance or scrutiny
OF THE SENSES, especially anything tangible or visible. That which is perceived, known,
thought of, or signiÞed; THAT TOWARD WHICH A COGNITIVE ACT IS DIRECTED. The
term includes WHATEVER MAY BE PRESENTED TO THE MIND AS WELL AS TO THE
SENSES: whatever, also, is acted upon or operated upon afÞrmatively (positively), or
intentionally inßuenced by anything done, moved, or applied thereto, it may be used as
having the sense of effect. (Black4)

ALLOCATUR - Latin. It is allowed. A word formerly used to denote that a writ or order was
allowed. A word denoting THE ALLOWANCE BY A MASTER or prothonotary of a bill
referred for his consideration, whether touching costs, damages, or matter of account. A
special allocatur is the special allowance of a writ (particularly a writ of error) which is required
in some particular cases. (Black4)

ALLOCABLE - Synonymous with “distributable.” In analyzing accounts, the breaking down

of a lump sum charged or credited to one account into several parts to be charged or credited
to other accounts. (Black4)

ALLOCATE - Power to allocate critical materials including power to distribute, to assign, to

allot. TO RATION OR WITHHOLD FROM PRIVATE CONSUMPTION. (Black4)

ALLOCATION - An allowance made upon an account in the English exchequer. Placing or

adding to a thing. ASSIGNMENT or allotment. (Black4)

ALLOW - The word has no rigid or precise meaning, but its import varies according to
circumstances or context in connection with which it is used. It may mean bestow, ASSIGN,
TO ANY ONE AS HIS RIGHT OR DUE, to accord, or to imply discretion, or unqualiÞed
and deÞnite PROMISE TO DO SOME SPECIFIED THING. TO APPROVE OF, ACCEPT AS
TRUE, APPROVE, ADMIT, CONCEDE, ADOPT, or FIX. To grant something as a deduction
or an addition; to abate or deduct; as, to allow a sum for leakage. To GRANT, or PERMIT; AS
TO ALLOW AN APPEAL OR A MARRIAGE; to allow an account or claim. Also to give a Þt
portion out of a larger property or fund. TO SANCTION, either directly or indirectly, AS
OPPOSED TO MERELY SUFFERING A THING TO BE DONE. TO ACQUIESCE IN. TO
SUFFER, TO TOLERATE; to Þx. (Black4)

ALLOW - verb transitive - [Latin loco, TO LAY, set, place. See Lay.] 1. To grant, give or yield;
as, TO ALLOW A SERVANT HIS LIBERTY; to allow a PENSION. 2. To admit; as, TO
ALLOW THE TRUTH OF A PROPOSITION; to allow a CLAIM. 3. To admit; TO OWN OR
ACKNOWLEDGE; as, to allow the right of the President to displace ofÞcers. 4. To approve,
justify or SANCTION. Ye allow the DEEDS of your fathers. Luke 11:48. Romans 8:1. 5. To
afford, or grant as a compensation; as, to allow a dollar a day for wages. 6. To abate or deduct;
as, to allow a sum for tare or leakage. 7. To permit; TO GRANT LICENSE TO; as, to allow a
son to be absent. (Webs1828)

PENSION - An allowance made to any one without an equivalent. In England, it is generally

understood to mean PAY GIVEN TO A STATE HIRELING FOR TREASON TO HIS
COUNTRY. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1755)

PATRON - One who countenances, supports or protects. Commonly a wretch who supports
with insolence, and is PAID WITH FLATTERY (i.e., title). (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the
English Language, 1755)

POLITICIAN - 1. One versed in the ARTS of government; one skilled in politicks. 2. A

MAN OF ARTIFICE; ONE OF DEEP CONTRIVANCE. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the
English Language, 1755)

!576
LAY - preterit tense of LIE. - The estate lay in the county (legal Þction/municipal corporation) of
Hartford. When Ahab heard these words, he rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his head,
and fasted and lay in sackcloth. 1 Kings 21:27. - verb transitive preterit tense and participle passive -
laid. [Latin loco, whence locus, Eng. ley or lea. The primary sense is to send or throw; hence this
word is the Latin LEGO, legare, differently applied; Gr. to lie down.] 1. Literally, to throw
down; hence, to put or place; applied to things broad or long, and in this respect differing
from set. We lay a book on the table, when we place it on its side, but we set it on the end. We
lay the foundation of a house, but we set a building on its foundation. He laid his robe from
him. Jonah 3:6… TO BEAT DOWN; TO PROSTRATE. Violent winds with rain lay corn and
grass. 3. TO SETTLE; to Þx and keep from rising. A shower lays the dust. 4. To place in order;
to dispose with regularity in building; as, to lay bricks or stones in constructing walls. 5. To
spread on a surface; as, to lay plaster or paint. 6. To spread or set; as, to lay snares. 7. To calm;
to appease; to still; to allay. After a tempest, when the winds are laid. 8. To quiet; to still; to
restrain from walking; as, TO LAY THE DEVIL. 9. To spread and set in order; to prepare; as,
to lay a table for dinner. 10. To place in the earth for growth. The chief time of laying
gillißowers, is in July. 11. To place at hazard; to wage; TO STAKE; as, to lay a crown or an
eagle; to lay a wager. 12. To bring forth; to exclude; as, to lay eggs. 13. To add; TO JOIN. Woe
to them that join house to house, that lay Þeld to Þeld. Isaiah 5:6. 14. To put; to apply. She
layeth her hand to the spindle. Proverbs 31:19. 15. To assess; TO CHARGE; TO IMPOSE; as,
to lay a tax on land; TO LAY A DUTY on salt. 16. To charge; to impute; as, TO LAY BLAME
ON ONE; to lay want of prudence to one's charge. 17. TO IMPOSE, AS EVIL, BURDEN, OR
PUNISHMENT. The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. Isaiah 5:63. 18. TO ENJOIN
AS A DUTY; as, TO LAY COMMANDS ON ONE. 19. To exhibit; to present or offer; as, to
lay an indictment in a particular county. 20. To prostrate; TO SLAY. The leaders Þrst he laid
along. 21. To depress and lose sight of, by sailing or departing from; as, to lay the land; A
SEAMAN'S PHRASE. 22. To station; to set; as, to lay an ambush. 23. TO CONTRIVE; TO
SCHEME; TO PLAN. To lay a cable, to twist or unite the strands. To lay apart, to put away; to
reject. Lay apart all Þlthiness. James 1:21. 1. To lay aside, to put off or away; not to retain. Let
us lay aside every weight, and the sin that doth so easily beset us. Hebrews 12:1. 2. To
discontinue; as, to lay aside the use of any thing. To lay away, to reposit in store; to put aside
for preservation. To lay before, to exhibit; to show; to present to view. The papers are laid
before Congress. 1. To lay by, to reserve for future use. Let every one of you lay by him in store,
as God hath prospered him. 1 Corinthians 16:2. 2. To put away; to dismiss. Let brave spirits
not be laid by, as persons unnecessary for the time. 3. To put off. And she arose and went
away, and laid by her veil. Genesis 38:1. 1. To lay down, to deposit, AS A PLEDGE, equivalent
or satisfaction; to resign. I lay down my life for the sheep. John 10:15. 2. To give up; to resign;
to quit or relinquish; as, to lay down an ofÞce or commission. 3. To quit; TO SURRENDER
THE USE OF; as, TO LAY DOWN ONE'S ARMS. 4. To offer or advance; as, to lay down a
proposition or principle. To lay one's self down, to commit to repose. I will both lay me
down in peace and sleep - Psalms 4:8. To lay hold of, TO SEIZE; to catch. To lay hold on, is
used in a like sense. To lay in, to store; TO TREASURE; to provide previously. To lay on, to
apply with force; to inßict; as, to lay on blows. To lay open, to open; to make bare; to uncover;
also, to show; to expose; to reveal; as, to lay open the designs of an enemy. To lay over, to
spread over; to incrust; to cover the surface; as, to lay over with gold or silver. 1. To lay out, to
expend; as, to lay out money, or sums of money. 2. To display; to discover. He takes occasion
to lay out bigotry and false conÞdence in all its colors. Obsolete. 3. To plan; to dispose in
order the several parts; as, to lay out a garden. 4. To dress in grave clothes and place in a
decent posture; as, to lay out a corpse. Shakespeare uses to lay forth. 5. To exert; as, to lay out
all one's strength. So with the reciprocal pronoun, to lay one's self out, is to exert strength. 1.
To lay to, TO CHARGE UPON; to impute. 2. To apply with vigor. 3. To attack or harass.
Obsolete. 4. To check the motion of a ship, and cause her to be stationary. To lay together, to
collect; to bring to one place; also, to bring into one view. To lay to heart, to permit to affect
greatly. To lay under, TO SUBJECT TO; as, TO LAY ONE UNDER RESTRAINT OR
OBLIGATION. 1. To lay up, to store; to treasure; to reposit for future use. Lay up for
yourselves treasures in heaven. Matthew 6:19. 2. To conÞne to the bed or chamber. He is laid
up with the gout. To lay siege, to besiege; to encompass with an army. To lay wait, to station

!577
 for private attack; to lay in ambush for. To lay the course, in sailing, is to sail towards the port
intended, without gibing. To lay waste, to destroy; to desolate; to deprive of inhabitants,
improvements and productions. To lay the land, in seamen's language, IS TO CAUSE THE
LAND APPARENTLY TO SINK OR APPEAR LOWER, by sailing from it; the distance
diminishing the elevation. - verb intransitive - 1. To bring or produce eggs. Hens will greedily
eat the herb that will make them lay the better. 2. To contrive; to form a scheme. [Unusual.] To
lay about, to strike or throw the arms on all sides; to act with vigor. To lay at, to strike or to
endeavor to strike. The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold. Job 41:8. 1. To lay out, TO
PURPOSE; TO INTEND. He lays out to make a journey. 2. To take measures. I made strict
inquiry wherever I came, and laid out for intelligence of all places. To lay upon, to importune.
Obsolete. - noun - 1. That which lies or is laid; a row; a stratum; a layer; one rank in a series
reckoned upward; as a lay of wood. A viol should have a lay of wire-strings below. 2. A bet; a
wager. [Little used.] 3. Station; rank. [Not used.] - noun [Latin locus. See lay the verb. The
words which signify PLACE, are from VERBS which express setting or laying. It is written
also ley, and lea, but less properly.] A meadow; a plain or plat of grass land. A tuft of daisies on
a ßowery lay. The lowing herd wind slowly o'er the lea. - noun - [Gr. to sound. Latin laudo,
plaudo.] A song; as a loud or soft lay; immortal lays. [It is used chießy in poetry.] - adjective -
[Latin laicus, Gr. from PEOPLE.] Pertaining to the laity or people, as distinct from the clergy;
not clerical; as a lay person; a lay preacher; a lay brother. (Webs1828)

CHARGED - participle passive - Loaded; burdened; ATTACKED; LAID ON; instructed;

imputed; ACCUSED; PLACED TO THE DEBT; ordered; commanded. (Webs1828)

CREDITED - participle passive - BELIEVED; TRUSTED; passed to the credit, or entered on

the credit side of an account. (Webs1828)

—=—

Reading this deÞnition of what is a lie, as what are the best laid plans to deceive and entrap, is like
viewing the vast, circular construct and code that is The Matrix Ñ the artiÞcial womb.

As strange as it may seem, we must comprehend that the lie exists, similarly to the notion that
virtual reality exists, and therefore that government artiÞcially exists, for to lie is to exist and stand
in Þction and in subsistence of and by our belief in the big lie and conÞrmation of it through our
actions, respect, and participation in it. Only our conscious efforts to not believe in (love) the legal
lie may destroy all that lays as the existence of that big lie. Only the fear of God in anticipation of the
consequences of believing and not fearing the lie may destroy the power and effect of the lie. Legal
existence (the big lie) is laid when it is constituted and thus conÞrmed to exist by our own avoidable
actions breathing life into its false admixed name (noun). Before any man can pro-stitute himself to
a Þctional master, that master must con-stitute the thing by which those men may then pro-stitute
themselves by their own voluntary actions. We must all be Þguratively prostrated (conquered/
purchased/morally destroyed) so that we may be ruled over.

This is the legal matrix; a simulated reality.

—=—


“…WE ALL LIE TO OURSELVES; we tell our own selves more lies than
we ever do other people.” 

―Philip K. Dick, quoted from: ‘Counter-Clock World’

—=—

But here also we may come to a pinnacle of understanding as to what every form of “law” is. For
law is only ever that which is laid by some authority, some sovereign power or entity, including

!578
both God and men pretending to be as such. By Webster’s constant, intentional separation of the
opposing versions of law we follow, it should become quite clear to the reader as to what the
Highest, self-evident Law is and that all other forms are only the creations of man’s i-magi-nations.
And so it should also become clear how man’s legal codes are all a lie, based completely on
Þctional persons, places, and things, having nothing to do with GodÕs Law of Nature.

Note that the ÒLaw of NatureÓ and the ÒLaws of NatureÓ are separate terms. The satanist often
mixes up in purposeful fallacy the physical Laws of Nature as the attributes of Life with the rules
of conduct that are the Law of Nature. Though both are the self-evident Truth of GodÕs Design,
paganism is designed to worship only the attributes of Nature as gods, ignoring the True Law of
God, a set of Moral Laws said to be the unwritten Word of God, the harmony that allows man’s
adventure in GodÕs Nature to be Pure and equitable in all things. This distinction is key. And the
distinction between what is laid by God (Designed) and what is laid by man is also of the utmost
importance. For the laws of man are a lie, based only upon Þctions of the mind, and are opposed to
the unenforceable Law and Laws of Nature. The essence of the True Religion of scripture is to Live
and obey at all times in Piety the Law according to this very self-evident distinction.

Again, whatever law we choose to follow is also a representation of the god we choose to follow.
He that is without mark and unblemished by surname or other Þctions follows GodÕs Law alone.
He who takes the mark that signiÞes his Self to be a beast must follow the gods of beasts under the
false law of man. This is the foundation of all law. And although the Bible is considered as the
foundational part of the common law, we must not embrace any part of the common law as is
deÞned below, for this would be an addition of false doctrine (law). To embrace the Bible as Law is
to abandon all of manÕs law, especially the ÒjusticeÓ de-livered of the courts. Any yet the courts
acknowledge the Bible as the Highest Law. And so we must establish our Law to the courts so that
they may not include their own judicial opinions and past, customary practices and presidents in
an attempt to overcome the Word of God; to overcome our True Nature and Source of Creation. To
accomplish this, we must never operate in any proprietary Þctional person, place, or thing that falls
within that courts imaginary, artiÞcial jurisdiction. We must be conscious at all times the difference
between Reality and Þction, between God and what is adversarial (satanic) to God, of the Law of
Nature versus the law of man. And sadly, in order to accomplish this ultimate state of wisdom, we
must do as the Bible instructs in Matthew, Chapter 10, becoming as sheep of the ßock of Jesus. We
do this, however, not only by knowledge and manifestation of the Law of GodÕs Nature, but by
becoming wise as the serpent that seeks to beguile us in Þction and art, for only with the know-
ledge of evil (artiÞce) may we avoid it utterly, remaining as harmless as doves, in-juring no man, no
thing, no place, and no person. Remember, to injure any man is to invoke his name in the legal
capacity of law. Forgiveness and forgiveness alone in Pure Love and Charity is the only sure way to
avoid the legal realm. For to invoke the name of another in Þction, both the accused and the accuser
must take the false (sur) name in legal personiÞcation of evil (artiÞce), for to sue a Þctional person
one must become a Þctional person. One must seek the judgement of man over the judgement of
God by invoking manÕs ßattering title as a god (magistrate). But to be clear, in order to cause a man
in ßattering legal title to ÒjudgeÓ my enemy, I must also allow my Self to be judged by that in-
vented persona of Þction. I must commit a crime against the Laws of Nature by invoking the
Þctional person of that man, a person that does not Exist in Nature or under Its Laws. And so I am
breaking the fundamental Law of Nature by my conduct, for I am injuring (bringing into Þctional
law) a man by his surety to that strawman. To this crime there is no excuse before God, for this is
akin to seeking the opinion and law of the king of lies.

Thus we may now understand the intent of the Bible when it states in James, Chapter 5 that we
should: ÒGrudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge
standeth before the door,Ó in Matthew, Chapter 7 that we should, ÒJudge not, that ye be not
judged,Ó in Luke, Chapter 6 that we should, ÒJudge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not,
and ye shall not be condemned, forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.Ó

One cannot judge another unless he is already judged (doomed) at birth. Persons can only rejudged
by other persons, and men only by Jehovah. The law of man is a lie, and believing in (loving) the lie

!579
through its persona is a curse upon your Life, that you should be required to live in the spiritual
death of a civil, debtor’s hell.

LAW - noun - [Latin lex; from the root of LAY. See lay. A law is THAT WHICH IS LAID, SET
OR FIXED, like statute, constitution, from Latin statuo.] 1. A rule, particularly an established
or permanent rule, PRESCRIBED BY THE SUPREME POWER OF A STATE TO ITS
SUBJECTS, FOR REGULATING THEIR ACTIONS, PARTICULARLY THEIR SOCIAL
ACTIONS. Laws are imperative or mandatory, COMMANDING what shall be done;
prohibitory, RESTRAINING from what is to be forborn; or permissive, DECLARING
WHAT MAY BE DONE WITHOUT INCURRING A PENALTY. The laws which enjoin the
duties of piety and morality, are prescribed by God and found in the Scriptures. Law is
beneÞcence acting by rule. 2. Municipal law is a rule of civil conduct PRESCRIBED BY THE
SUPREME POWER OF A STATE, commanding what its subjects are to do, and prohibiting
what they are to forbear; a statute. Municipal or civil laws are established by the decrees,
edicts or ordinances OF ABSOLUTE PRINCES, as emperors and kings, or by the formal acts
of the legislatures of free (franchise) states. Law therefore is sometimes equivalent to decree,
edict, or ordinance. 3. LAW OF NATURE, is a rule of conduct arising out of the natural
relations of human beings ESTABLISHED BY THE CREATOR, AND EXISTING PRIOR TO
ANY POSITIVE PRECEPT. Thus it is a law of nature, that one man should not INJURE
another, AND MURDER AND FRAUD WOULD BE CRIMES, INDEPENDENT OF ANY
PROHIBITION (I.E., LICENSURE) FROM A SUPREME POWER. 4. Laws of animal nature,
the inherent principles by which the economy and functions of animal bodies are performed,
such as respiration, the circulation of the blood, digestion, nutrition, various secretions, etc. 5.
Laws of vegetation, the principles by which plats are produced, and their growth carried on till
they arrive to perfection. 6. Physical laws, or laws of nature. The invariable tendency or
determination of any species of matter to a particular form with deÞnite properties, and the
determination of a body to certain motions, changes, and relations, which uniformly take place
in the same circumstances, is called a physical law. These tendencies or determinations,
whether called laws or affections of matter, have been established by the Creator, and are,
with a peculiar felicity of expression, denominated in Scripture, ordinances of heaven. 7.
Laws of nations, the rules that regulate the MUTUAL INTERCOURSE OF NATIONS OR
STATES. These rules depend on natural law OR THE PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE WHICH
SPRING FROM THE SOCIAL STATE; OR THEY ARE FOUNDED ON CUSTOMS,
COMPACTS, TREATIES, LEAGUES AND AGREEMENTS BETWEEN INDEPENDENT
COMMUNITIES. By the law of nations, we are to understand that code of PUBLIC
instruction, which deÞnes the rights and prescribes the duties of nations, IN THEIR
INTERCOURSE WITH EACH OTHER. 8. Moral law, a law which prescribes to men THEIR
RELIGIOUS AND SOCIAL DUTIES, in other words, THEIR DUTIES TO GOD AND TO
EACH OTHER. The moral law is summarily contained in the decalogue or ten
commandments, written by the Þnger of God on two tables of stone, and delivered to Moses
on mount Sinai. Exodus 20:1. 9. Ecclesiastical law, a rule of action PRESCRIBED FOR THE
GOVERNMENT OF A CHURCH; otherwise called CANON LAW. 10. Written law, a law or
rule of action PRESCRIBED OR ENACTED BY A SOVEREIGN, and promulgated and
recorded IN WRITING; a written statute, ordinance, edict or decree. 11. UNWRITTEN OR
COMMON LAW, a rule of action which derives its authority FROM LONG USAGE, OR
ESTABLISHED CUSTOM, which has been immemorially RECEIVED AND RECOGNIZED
BY JUDICIAL TRIBUNALS. As this law can be TRACED TO NO POSITIVE STATUTES, its
rules or principles are to be FOUND ONLY IN THE RECORDS OF COURTS, AND IN THE
REPORTS OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS. 12. By-law, a law of a city, town or private
corporation. [See By.] 13. Mosaic law the institutions of Moses, or the code of laws
prescribed to the Jews, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE GOSPEL. 14. Ceremonial law
THE MOSAIC INSTITUTIONS WHICH PRESCRIBE THE EXTERNAL RITES AND
CEREMONIES TO BE OBSERVED BY THE JEWS, AS DISTINCT FROM THE MORAL
PRECEPTS, WHICH ARE OF PERPETUAL OBLIGATION. 15. A rule of direction; a
directory; as reason and natural conscience. These, having not the law as a law to themselves.
Romans 2:12. 16. That which governs or has a tendency to rule; that which has the power of

!580
 controlling. But I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind,
AND BRINGING ME INTO CAPTIVITY TO THE LAW OF SIN WHICH IS IN MY
MEMBERS. Romans 7:1. 17. THE WORD OF GOD; the doctrines and precepts of God, or his
revealed will. But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in his law doth he meditate day
and night. Psalms 1:2. 18. The Old Testament. Is it not written in your law I said, ye are gods?
John 10:34. 19. The institutions of Moses, AS DISTINCT FROM THE OTHER PARTS OF
THE OLD TESTAMENT; as the law and the prophets. 20. A rule or axiom OF SCIENCE OR
ART; SETTLED PRINCIPLE; as the laws of versiÞcation or poetry. 21. Law martial, or martial
law, the rules ordained for the government of an army or military force. 22. Marine laws,
rules for the regulation of NAVIGATION, AND THE COMMERCIAL INTERCOURSE OF
NATIONS. 23. Commercial law, law-merchant, the system of rules by which TRADE AND
COMMERCIAL INTERCOURSE are regulated between merchants. 24. Judicial process;
prosecution OF RIGHT in courts of law. Tom Touchy is a fellow famous for taking the law of
every body. Hence the phrase, to go to law to prosecute; to seek redress in a legal tribunal. 25.
Jurisprudence; as in the title, Doctor of Laws. 26. In general, law is a rule of action prescribed
for the government of rational beings or moral AGENTS, TO WHICH RULE THEY ARE
BOUND TO YIELD OBEDIENCE, IN DEFAULT OF WHICH THEY ARE EXPOSED TO
PUNISHMENT; OR LAW IS A SETTLED MODE OR COURSE OF ACTION OR
OPERATION IN IRRATIONAL BEINGS AND IN INANIMATE BODIES. Civil law,
criminal law [See Civil and Criminal.] Laws of honor. [See Honor.] Law language, the
language used in legal writings and forms, PARTICULARLY THE NORMAN DIALECT OR
OLD FRENCH, which was used in judicial proceedings from the days of William the
conqueror to the 36th year of Edward III. Wager of law, a species of trial formerly used in
England, in which the defendant gave security that he would, on a certain day, make his law
that is, he would make oath that he owed nothing to the plaintiff, and would produce eleven
of his neighbors as compurgators, who should swear that they believed in their consciences
that he had sworn the truth. (Webs1828)

—=—

If the reader is not clear as to these deÞnitions of what each form of law equates to, please revisit
this entry now. For we must at all times know what is a creation of man and what is the self-
evident Creation of God. Our very Lives, our souls depend upon this ability to know without
doubt, and this knowledge will manifest as a sign of conÞdence before any pretended agent of
government that seeks to injure you by legal word magic.

Let us now examine the artiÞcial nature of the United States, for it would not exist but for the legal
process and ceremonial rite of legal conÞrmation. The birth process is also an act in need of future,
eventual conÞrmation, as the abandonment of an infant to be found as pirate booty (sunken
treasure) by the state in its district (seizure), becoming the conÞrmed status (strawman) attached to
that man when the infant comes to the age of consent to his own adultery.

To be clear, all law must be conÞrmed and ratiÞed, for it is Þction, stemming not from GodÕs
Nature. What is artiÞcial must be proven and conÞrmed/ratiÞed. What is Real needs no such artful
ratiÞcation, especially your Self. What is Real is laid only in the self-Existence of Jehovah. To con-
Þrm anything is to worship that which is known to be false as that which is true. The Truth of
Reality stands without conÞrmation of manÕs laws and opinions of it.

LEGALIZATION - The act of legalizing or MAKING legal or lawful. (Black4)

LEGALLY - Lawfully; ACCORDING TO LAW. (Black4)

LEGALIZE - TO MAKE legal or lawful. TO CONFIRM OR VALIDATE WHAT WAS

BEFORE VOID OR UNLAWFUL. TO ADD THE SANCTION AND AUTHORITY OF LAW
TO THAT WHICH BEFORE WAS WITHOUT OR AGAINST LAW. (Black4)

!581
CONFIRMATION - contracts, conveyancing. 1 . A contract by which THAT WHICH WAS
VOIDABLE, IS MADE FIRM AND UNAVOIDABLE. 2. A species of conveyance. 2. - 1.
When a contract has been entered into by a stranger without authority, he in whose NAME it
has been made may, by his own act, conÞrm it; or if the contract be made by the party
himself in an INFORMAL and VOIDABLE manner, he may in a more formal manner
CONFIRM and RENDER IT VALID; and in that event it will take effect, as between the
parties, FROM THE ORIGINAL MAKING. To make a valid conÞrmation, THE PARTY
MUST BE APPRISED OF, HIS RIGHTS, AND WHERE THERE HAS BEEN A FRAUD IN
THE TRANSACTION, HE MUST BE AWARE OF IT, AND INTEND TO CONFIRM HIS
CONTRACT. 3. - 2. Lord Coke deÞnes a conÞrmation of an estate, to be "a conveyance of an
estate or right in esse, whereby a voidable estate is made SURE and UNAVOIDABLE; or
where a particular estate is increased.Ó ÉThe proper technical words of a conÞrmation are,
RATIFY AND CONFIRM; although it is usual and prudent to insert also the words given and
granted. 5. A conÞrmation does not strengthen a void estate. ConÞrmatio est nulla, ubi donum
precedens est invalidum, et ubi donatio nulla est nec valebit conÞrmatio. For conÞrmation may make
a voidable or defeasible estate good, but cannot operate on an estate void in law. THE
CANON LAW AGREES WITH THIS RULE, and hence the maxim, qui conÞrmat nihil dat. 6.
AN INFANT IS SAID TO CONFIRM HIS ACTS PERFORMED DURING INFANCY,
WHEN, AFTER COMING TO FULL AGE, HE EXPRESSLY APPROVES OF THEM, OR
DOES ACTS FROM WHICH SUCH CONFIRMATION MAY BE IMPLIED. See RatiÞcation.
(Bouv1856)

EXPRESSLY - adverb - IN DIRECT TERMS; plainly. (Webs1828)

EXPRESS - That which is made known, and not left to implication. The opposite of implied.
It is a rule, that WHEN A MATTER OR THING IS EXPRESSED, IT CEASES TO BE
IMPLIED BY LAW: expressum facit cessare tacitum. (Bouv1856)

TACITLY - adverb - SILENTLY; BY IMPLICATION; WITHOUT WORDS; as, he tacitly

assented. (Webs1828)

TACIT - adjective - [Latin tacitus, from taceo, TO BE SILENT, that is, to stop, or to close. See
Tack.] Silent; IMPLIED, BUT NOT EXPRESSED. Tacit consent is CONSENT BY SILENCE,
OR NOT INTERPOSING AN OBJECTION. So we say, a tacit agreement or covenant of men
to live under a particular government, when no objection or opposition is made; A TACIT
SURRENDER OF A PART OF OUR NATURAL RIGHTS; a tacit reproach, etc. (Webs1828)

TACIT - That which, ALTHOUGH NOT EXPRESSED, IS UNDERSTOOD FROM THE

NATURE OF THE THING, or from the provision of the law; implied. (Bouv1856)

TACIT LAW - A law which derives its authority FROM THE COMMON CONSENT OF
THE PEOPLE, WITHOUT ANY LEGISLATIVE ENACTMENT. (Bouv1856)

CONFIRMOR - He who makes a conÞrmation to another. (Bouv1856)

CONFIRMEE - He to whom a conÞrmation is made. (Bouv1856)

TO RECEIVE - VOLUNTARILY to take from another what is offered… (Bouv1856)

RATIHABITIO - Latin. CONFIRMATION, AGREEMENT, CONSENT, approbation of a

contract. (Black4)

RATIHABITION - Contracts. CONFIRMATION; APPROBATION OF A CONTRACT;

ratiÞcation. (Bouv1856)

!582
RATIFICATION - In a broad sense, the CONFIRMATION of a previous act done either by
the party himself OR BY ANOTHER; CONFIRMATION OF A VOIDABLE ACT. The
afÞrmance by a person of a prior act which did not bind him, but which was done or
professedly done on his account, whereby the act, as to some or all persons, IS GIVEN
EFFECT AS IF ORIGINALLY AUTHORIZED BY HIM. The adoption by one, AS BINDING
UPON HIMSELF, of an act done in such RELATIONS that he may claim it as done for his
BENEFIT, ALTHOUGH DONE UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES AS WOULD NOT
BIND HIM EXCEPT FOR HIS SUBSEQUENT ASSENT. It is equivalent to a previous
authorization and relates back to time when act ratiÞed was done, except where intervening
rights of third persons are concerned. In the law of PRINCIPAL AND AGENT, the adoption
and conÞrmation BY ONE PERSON with knowledge of all material facts, OF AN ACT OR
CONTRACT PERFORMED OR ENTERED INTO IN HIS BEHALF BY ANOTHER WHO
AT THE TIME ASSUMED WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO ACT AS HIS AGENT. RatiÞcation
of transaction involves same elements as making of new contract, and understanding of
material facts necessary to an intelligent assent is essential to "ratiÞcation." Essence of
"ratiÞcation" BY PRINCIPAL OF ACT OF AGENT IS MANIFESTATION OF MENTAL
DETERMINATION by principal to afÞrm the act, and this may be manifested by written
word or by spoken word OR BY CONDUCT, or may be inferred from known circumstances
and principal's acts in relation thereto. To constitute ratiÞcation of voidable contract the act
relied on must be performed with full knowledge of its consequences and with an express
intention of ratifying what is known to be voidable. EXPRESS ratiÞcations are those made
in express and direct terms of assent. IMPLIED ratiÞcations are such as the law presumes
from the acts of the principal. Estoppel and ratiÞcation distinguished. See Estoppel. (Black4)

RATE - A PUBLIC VALUATION or assessment of every man's ESTATE; or the ascertaining

how much TAX every one shall pay. (Bouv1856)

RATIFY - To approve and sanction; TO MAKE VALID; TO CONFIRM; to give sanction to.
Though sometimes used synonymously, from a strictly lexical standpoint, THE WORD
"ADOPT" SHOULD BE USED TO APPLY TO VOID TRANSACTIONS, while the word
"ratify" should be limited to the FINAL APPROVAL OF A VOIDABLE TRANSACTION BY
ONE WHO THERETOFORE HAD THE OPTIONAL RIGHT TO RELIEVE HIMSELF
FROM ITS OBLIGATIONS. (Black4)

RATIFY - verb transitive - [Latin ratum facio, TO MAKE FIRM.] 1. TO CONFIRM; to establish;
to settle. We have ratiÞed to them the borders of Judea. 2. TO APPROVE AND SANCTION;
to make valid; as, to ratify an agreement or treaty. (Webs1828)

SANCTION - verb - To assent, concur, CONFIRM, OR RATIFY. - noun - In the original sense
of the word, a penalty or punishment provided as a means of enforcing obedience to a law.
In jurisprudence, a law is said to have a sanction WHEN THERE IS A STATE which will
intervene if it is disobeyed or disregarded. THEREFORE INTERNATIONAL LAW HAS NO
LEGAL SANCTION. In a more general sense, A CONDITIONAL EVIL ANNEXED TO A
LAW TO PRODUCE OBEDIENCE TO THAT LAW; and, in a still wider sense, an
authorization of anything. Occasionally, "sanction" is used (e.g., in Roman law) to denote A
STATUTE, the part (PENAL CLAUSE) being used to denote the whole. The VINDICATORY
PART of a law, or THAT PART WHICH ORDAINS OR DENOUNCES A PENALTY FOR
ITS VIOLATION. (Black4)

SANCTUARY - In old English law. A CONSECRATED PLACE which had certain privileges
annexed to it, and to which offenders were accustomed to resort for refuge, because THEY
COULD NOT BE ARRESTED THERE, NOR THE LAWS BE EXECUTED. (Black4)

RATIFICATION - Contracts. An agreement TO ADOPT AN ACT PERFORMED BY

ANOTHER FOR US… 6. AN INFANT IS NOT LIABLE ON HIS CONTRACTS; BUT IF,
AFTER COMING OF AGE, HE RATIFY THE CONTRACT BY AN ACTUAL OR EXPRESS

!583
DECLARATION, HE WILL BE BOUND TO PERFORM IT, AS IF IT HAD BEEN MADE
AFTER HE ATTAINED FULL AGE. The ratiÞcation must be voluntary, deliberate, and
intelligent, and the party must know that without it, he would not be bound. But a
conÞrmation or ratiÞcation of a contract, MAY BE IMPLIED FROM ACTS OF THE INFANT
AFTER HE BECOMES OF AGE; AS BY ENJOYING OR CLAIMING A BENEFIT UNDER A
CONTRACT HE MIGHT HAVE WHOLLY RESCINDED; and an infant partner will be liable
for the contracts of the Þrm, or at least such as were known to him, if he, after becoming of
age, conÞrm the contract of partnership by transacting business of the Þrm, receiving
proÞts, and the like. (Bouv1856)

RATIFICATION OF TREATIES - The constitution of the United States, art. 2, s. 2, declares

that the president shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, to
make treaties, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur. 2. So NO TREATY IS
THEREFORE OF ANY VALIDITY TO BIND THE NATION UNLESS IT HAS BEEN
RATIFIED by two-thirds of the members present in the senate at the time its expediency or
propriety may have been discussed. Vide Treaty. (Bouv1856)

RATIFICATION - Acceptance or adoption of AN ACT PERFORMED BY ANOTHER AS

AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE; in particular, CONFIRMATION OF WHAT HAS BEEN
DONE WITHOUT ORIGINAL AUTHORITY. AN ADOPTION OF A CONTRACT MADE
ON OUR BEHALF BY SOMEONE WHOM WE DID NOT AUTHORIZE, WHICH RELATES
BACK TO THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT AND RENDERS IT OBLIGATORY
FROM THE OUTSET. Requires some POSITIVE, ASSERTIVE ACT. An "estoppel" may be
created by silence. Refers to contracts BETWEEN PRIVATE PERSONA, to treaties between
states, AND TO CHANGES PROPOSED IN WRITTEN CONSTITUTIONS. 1. RatiÞcation
of the unauthorized act of another operates upon the act ratiÞed AS IF AUTHORITY TO
DO THE ACT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY GIVEN, except where the rights of third parties
have intervened between the act and the ratiÞcation. In other words, it is essential that the
party ratifying should be able not merely to do the act ratiÞed at the time the act was done,
BUT ALSO AT THE TIME THE RATIFICATION WAS MADE. It is by EXPRESS
CONSENT, OR BY CONDUCT inconsistent with any other hypothesis than that of
approval; BUT INOPERATIVE, IF THE PARTY SOUGHT TO BE CHARGED WAS NOT
COMPETENT TO MAKE THE CONTRACT WHEN THE SAME WAS MADE, nor when the
supposed act of ratiÞcation was performed, or if the contract was illegal, IMMORAL, or
against public policy. Where FRAUD is of such a character as to involve a crime, ratiÞcation
of the act from which it springs IS OPPOSED TO PUBLIC POLICY, and, hence, cannot be
permitted; BUT WHERE THE TRANSACTION IS CONTRARY ONLY TO GOOD FAITH
AND FAIR DEALING, WHERE IT AFFECTS INDIVIDUAL INTEREST MERELY,
RATIFICATION IS PERMITTED. Thus, the forgery of an indorsement, being a criminal act, is
incapable of ratiÞcation.' (WCA1889)

OBLIGATORY - A "writing obligatory" means, simply, a written contract UNDER SEAL.

(WCA1889)

OBLIGATION - A ligament or tie; SOMETHING WHICH BINDS ONE TO DO OR NOT

TO DO AN ACT. 1. In its most extensive sense, SYNONYMOUS WITH “DUTY.” (WCA1889)

NATURAL OR MORAL OBLIGATION - AN OBLIGATION WHICH CANNOT BE

ENFORCED BY ACTION, but which is nevertheless BINDING IN CONSCIENCE AND
ACCORDING TO NATURAL JUSTICE. OPPOSED (TO) CIVIL OR LEGAL
OBLIGATION… (WCA1889)

OBLIGATION (continued) - In Roman law, a contract was a pact, a convention plus an

obligation. So long as the pact remained unclothed with the obligation, it was ÒnudeÓ or
Ònaked.Ó An obligation was Òjuris vinculum, quo necessitate, adstringimur alicujus solvendoe
rei" (Justinian, Inst. Ht, 13, 1). The obligation is the "BOND" or "CHAIN," WITH WHICH

!584
THE LAW JOINS PERSONS TOGETHER IN CONSEQUENCE OF THEIR VOLUNTARY
ACTS. Obligatio may signify a right as well as a duty. The picture is that of a "LEGAL
CHAIN," and the two ends were equally regarded. The obligation was a PERSONAL
relation between two parties, A DEBTOR BOUND TO RENDER SOME SERVICE, A
CREDITOR TO RECEIVE IT. The debt was a binding (obligatio), the payment a releasing
(SOLUTIO), of the PERSON. THE CREDITORS HOLD WAS ON THE PERSON (later on
the property) of the debtor. The imperfect obligation (naturalis) could not, like the perfect
(civilis), be enforced by a direct action, BUT MIGHT HAVE FORCE IN INDIRECT WAYS.
Natural obligations arose from transactions which would have created civil ones, BUT FOR
SOME DEFECT IN FORM OR IN LEGAL CAPACITY. Civil obligations were those
STRICTI JURIS, subject to a literal and rigorous construction, and those bonae ßdei, in
which the aims of the parties and the demands of reason and equity were considered. 2. A
LEGAL DUTY; A LEGAL LIABILITY. A valid, subsisting obligation consists of a legal debt or
duty, and the remedy to enforce it. 3. AN UNDERTAKING UNDER SEAL; also, THE
INSTRUMENT OR WRITING BY WHICH IT IS EVIDENCED. A BOND, OR OTHER
WRITING IN THE NATURE OF A BOND. In a popular sense, ANY ACT BY WHICH A
PERSON BECOMES BOUND TO OR FOR ANOTHER, OR TO PERFORM SOMETHING.'
See Bond. (WCA1889)

AFFIRM - 1. To aver a thing as established or certain, or as existing, or as provable as a fact.

Whence afÞrmative, afÞrmation. (WCA1889)

AFFIRMATIVE - 1. - adjective - Asserting as true; DECLARATORY OF WHAT EXISTS or is

to be or to be done; POSITIVE. OPPOSED (TO) NEGATIVE. As, afÞrmative or an afÞrmative
— allegation, averment condition, covenant, defense, evidence, pleading, representation,
statute, warranty, words, (2) - noun - THE AFFIRMATIVE, THE PARTY WHO MAINTAINS
OR SUPPORTS. OPPOSED (TO) THE NEGATIVE. THE BURDEN OF PROOF RESTS
UPON HIM WHO HOLDS THE AFFIRMATIVE OF AN ISSUE. See Proof, Burden of.
(WCA1889)

AFFIRMATIVE PREGNANT - An AFFIRMATIVE allegation IMPLYING A NEGATIVE in

favor of the adverse party. Opposed (to) negative pregnant: a negative allegation involving
or admitting of AN AFFIRMATIVE IMPLICATION, or, at least, an implication favorable to
the adverse party. See Negative. (WCA1889)

NEGATIVE PREGNANT - The statement of a negative proposition in such a FORM as may

IMPLY or CARRY with it the admission of an AFFIRMATIVE. A fault, within the rule that a
pleading MUST NOT BE AMBIGUOUS IN MEANING. (WCA1889)

NEGATIVE - Is used in an untechnical sense, IN OPPOSITION TO AFFIRMATIVE OR

POSITIVE; as negative, or a negative — allegation, averment, condition, covenant, easement,
evidence, statute, qq. v. WHOEVER ASSERTS A RIGHT DEPENDENT FOR ITS
EXISTENCE UPON A NEGATIVE MUST ESTABLISH THE TRUTH OF THE NEGATIVE,
except where the matter is peculiarly within the knowledge of the adverse party - as, that the
latter has no license for selling liquor. It is NOT a maxim of law that a negative is
INCAPABLE of proof. When the negative ceases to be a SIMPLE one, — when it is qualiÞed
by TIME, PLACE, or CIRCUMSTANCE, — much of the objection is REMOVED; and proof
of a negative may reasonably be required WHEN THE QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
ARE THE DIRECT MATTER IN ISSUE, or the afÞrmative is either probable in itself, or
supported by a presumption, or peculiar means of proof are in the hands of the party
asserting the negative. WHEN A PRESUMPTION IS IN FAVOR OF A PARTY WHO
ASSERTS THE NEGATIVE, IT AFFORDS AN ADDITIONAL REASON FOR CASTING
THE BURDEN OF PROOF ON HIS ADVERSARY. It is when a presumption is in favor of
the party who asserts the afÞrmative that its effect becomes visible, as the opposite side is
then bound to prove his negative. One class of exceptions to the rule, that the burden of proof
rests on the party holding the afÞrmative, includes the cases in which the plaintiff grounds his

!585
 right of action upon a negative allegation which is an essential element in his case. So, where
the negative allegation involves a charge of criminal neglect of duty, or fraud, or the
wrongful violation of actual lawful possession of property, THE PARTY MAKING THE
ALLEGATION MUST PROVE IT; for in those cases the presumption of LAW IS IN FAVOR
OF THE PARTY CHARGED. See AfÞrm. (WCA1889)


—=—

STOP! Do not proceed with this work until the above statements about conÞrmation, express and
tacit consent, and ratiÞcation are fully comprehended. This is perhaps the most important part of
this entire presentation. For this is the deÞnition of adultery, as the voluntary acceptation of the
tacit (implied) contractual relationship through the expression (action) of the man (as agent) by the
use of the Þctional persona (principal property of government). The simple signing of the mixed
christian and sur-names as the combination of signature is the expression of will to be positively
protected and secured, which requires subjection to that law of persons. A sig-nature is an
expression of legal conÞrmation of that contractual state of debt slavery. Anything signed in person
is a binding contract of the person by its agent, which is the man in the legal ÒchainsÓ of surety to
that Þctional persona. For what is avoidable (negative, illegitimate) becomes unavoidable (positive
law) once any action is taken by the agentic surety under his principal. Actions conÞrm and ratify
words. One cannot act in the apparent beneÞt and protection of the person (citizenship) while also
denying to be in appearance (constat) of the person or as agent thereof. One cannot use the sur-
name and also deny the status and law attached to the surnameÕs use. If the reader may under-
stand just these terms of art and their deep meaning, then the reader may understand why citizen-
ship is voluntary (under the doctrine of master and servant). This is the foundation of voluntary
servitude to evil. It is also the foundation of abandoning both God and therefore the unalienable
rights implied under God.

And Þnally, when we comprehend the above artiÞcially binding concepts, we may truly under-
stand why the private founders of the several States (Peoples) and many Biblical scholars,
including Noah Webster, over and over stated that this government would only work based on
True christian, scriptural principals of Law and no other. Literally, this type of Òlimited govern-
mentÓ may only have success on a self-governing private People who reserve their Natural rights
and bind themselves to that Natural duty so implied thereof. Once any other form of law is
conÞrmed and ratiÞed the original intent is corrupted and ruined. And of course itÕs been turned
into the pirate coven we see today. If you still donÕt know why this word pirate is being used by the
author, you certainly will by the end of the next, summary chapter. So donÕt stop nowÉ

—=—

ÒA ratiÞcation is EQUAL TO A COMMAND.”

—Ratihabitio mandato sequiparatur. (WCA1889)

—=—

And this is why acting only according to christÕs teachings (i.e., ratifying and acting according to
only GodÕs Commandments and Law) is the only salvation and solution (solutio) from legal
tyranny, for only then can man avoid that which would be legally unavoidable by his christ-like
actions. The christian name alone is a negative, and cannot be afÞrmed or assumed as a legal name
(in-jured) with legal capacity or title without addition of a surname (agnomen = event name). This
is the story of christ, and the story of christ is nothing if not the potentiality of every man in his
own journey and avoidance of legal, artiÞcial things and states of false being under names and
ßattering titles.

While the church says pray with us (publicly) to have only the empty NAME (noun) of Jesus christ
become our imaginary lord and master in personiÞcation of man, the Bible tells us that we must,

!586
each of our own Self, master the teachings of christ (verb) and exclusively by christ’s example be
the christ-like master of our own Self. This is self-governance, self-discipline.

—=—

“He openeth also their ear TO DISCIPLINE, and commandeth that they
RETURN FROM INIQUITY. If they obey and serve him, they shall
spend their days in prosperity, and their years in pleasures. But if they
obey not, they shall perish by the sword, and THEY SHALL DIE
WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE.”
—Job 36:10-12, KJB

—=—

The follower of christ sees not christ as his vulgar and imagined lord, but instead recognizes that
christ is the self-evident Word (Law) of God and that only with christ (the Word/Law) may he be
self-governing under his True Lord Jehovah. It is patently ridiculous, when one ponders for only a
moment, that the church tells us to pray to God through the “name” (noun) of Jesus christ, when
the 1st and most important commandment is to have no other gods before Jehovah. If we were
acting christ-like, we would not need to pray for Grace, we would be actively walking in Grace by
christ’s path. And it should be noted that most prayers are for things that are not Creations of God,
as if the abundance of Nature is not enough. So why would such prayers be answered when the
pursuit of such Þctions and artiÞces is against GodÕs Word? Paradox! If God could indeed
reciprocate and correspond to the empty words of the typical public prayer, It would no doubt
inquire from us all just why we are making such a prank call, and that we should simply start
acting like Jesus the christ as the Word of Law as we are commanded. God would inquire as to why
we are calling personally instead of merely walking as that parabolic example given to us in the
scriptural teachings instead, and why we’re trying to prove that which does not Exist or which
merely re-presents and symbolizes something that already Exists in Nature despite such art and
imagery. We should stop bowing down to idols (images) and false gods in fancy dress and robes as
some pretended, protective shield, while at the same time never following the actual Word (Son).
And if not, if we do not follow the Law of God’s Nature, we shouldn’t inquire to God through
prayer or meditation or vain cursing of Its Name just why our Lives are so damned and messed up!
In other words, God would tell us to simply follow His Law (Son/Word) and stop calling him to Þx
the problems that would be non-existent if GodÕs Word was being followed in the Þrst place. God
would tell us that he sent the One example of man’s harmonious place in God’s Nature and that all
questions and prayers are answered within that story of the Word (Son) of God, and that our
problems would cease to Þctionally exist if we would but follow Him. For all our problems stem
from our own artiÞce, lies, and desires after false and Þctional persons, places, and things in
mammon. God would be like, WTF people? Get a clue. Read the instructions, idiots.

Our problems stem only from legal, artiÞcial things, like say the church and state and the false law
they conspire together to sustain as they have laid it against God’s Design. The man Living
spiritually under GodÕs Word should seek to ratify and conÞrm nothing of the artiÞce of man, for
he may only do so by undertaking a false persona in contracted admixture of his God-given First
name with the stateÕs Þctional title of legal surname in required worship of mammon. ManÕs dis-
ease is his legal strawman, the very root of all Þctional growths attached to him in surety.

Likewise, we must here see and feel the difference between the negative and the positive. The
agents of the legal matrix are always seeking to prove some presumption or inducement that can
turn a negative into a positive, a withholding into an afÞrmation, a duty into a declared right. I
may certainly Love and Know my mother and father in Nature, as they may Know and Love me.
But my afÞrmation as such in order to gain some legal thing, proÞt, beneÞt, protection, grant,

!587
patent, or any other aspect of Þction (lie) creates the presumption of desire and intent to impress
that child into the legal Þction for positive law purposes. That which is self-evident (negative) is
thus thrust into and afÞrmed as positive. That which before was ambiguous, disrespected, and
unseen by manÕs law is thus marked as its beast of burden. The man is made animal (soulless). The
positive claim afÞrms the legal status in persona, and so the presumption is conÞrmed. This is a
very difÞcult concept, but understanding it is absolutely necessary and is the foundation of the
scriptural, spiritual teachings and way. No thing positive and thus spiritually dead may touch that
negative, Natural path of Pure and un-adulterated Life.

And so we can see here that to tell the legal ÒtruthÓ or state a legal ÒfactÓ is often the act of a non
compos mentis fool, a lie afÞrmed to be as the ratiÞed and conÞrmed but artiÞcial truth in fact. For in
law, the truth is only ever a positive declaration and its acknowledgment of artiÞce (false positive),
though the positive truth about a negative (Reality) can only be a re-creation, as the positively
afÞrmed lie (legal name, legal deÞnition, and artful legal title) of its Þctional form and
consideration in law (artiÞce). In Nature, the Truth is undeniable. Only in Þction can GodÕs
Creation and self-evidence of Existence and Law as manÕs Highest Duty to It and each other be
denied, and only then can such a denial be violently protected as law. When the court can deny
Truth and then create and conÞrm lies as evidence at bar, then we know that we are certainly not
Living in the Reality and beauty of the Truth. Pray (plea) as we may to that false robed god in
judgement at bench (bank) in court, the Truth can and will never be heard by that Þctional
character and magistrate of the Þctional law.

An averment is made to cause manÕs negative state of being to become a false positive, to tune man
into that cartoon world by establishing a clear, alternative legal character in Þction, destroying his
ambiguity under God in his Pure christian name by afÞrming the opprobrious appellation of an
attached, tainting surname, number, and identifying marks. In other words, every time we go to
court or use our strawman we positively charge (conÞrm) that legal Þction and admit ourselves to
its realm of jurisdiction. We are afÞrmers each time we are summoned and thus conÞrm the lie of
our legally ÒtrueÓ and provable (positive) id-entity.

I am entrained to believe that I am Clint RichardsonÉ I am legal. I am the strawman. I pretend to live
at this Þctional, federally (legally) addressed place on the map, as registered under the Þctional
CaesarÕs postal district in seizure, distress, and distraint. I drive and act only commercially under
this Þctional, permissive photo id-entity. I appear here as the personiÞcation of all of these tokens,
signs, and proofs of id-entity that manifest my false, legal existence. I afÞrm that I am not, therefore,
appearing here as an Act of God, that I am not my own Self, not a man, that I have no spiritual,
Higher Law, that I deny GodÕs authority, and thus that I claim and reserve no unalienable Natural
Rights here at bar. I give my unholy, sacred (cursed) oath that these lies are all, in legal fact,
artiÞcially true before the magistrate gods and their agents at law. And I do so upon the very Bible
that would free me from this Þction in blasphemy and unintentional hatred towards it, worshiping
the public administrators of my legal persona as my false god. I am at the courtÕs mercy instead of
JehovahÕs, for my truth is positive and only positively Þction. And so please judge, please god, hear
my prayers (pleas), because I have just turned my back on the Real Nature of all things, Its God,
and Its negative power over your Þction. I throw my false-self at the mercy of the court, for I have
no master higher than the principal corporation that employs you.

All of this simply because I conÞrm to be a legal, admixed name. A picture ID is literally worth
1,000 cursed words.

And so what happens in a negative averment?

AVER - To assert for the truth; to state in that HE HAS NEVER BEEN DISCHARGED
FROM HIS POSITIVE TERMS; to allege FORMALLY. (WCA1889)

AVERMENT - A POSITIVE statement of the TRUTH OF A FACT; a FORMAL allegation in

pleadingÉ An averment in a declaration is a direct and positive allegation of fact, made in a
manner capable of being traversed (denied). It includes the idea of an AFFIRMATION to be

!588
 made out by inference and induction. “The use in pleading of an averment is to ascertain that
to the court which is generally or doubtfully expressed; so that the court may not be
perplexed of whom, or of what, it ought to be UNDERSTOOD; and TO ADD MATTER to
the plea TO MAKE DOUBTFUL THINGS CLEAR,” — as, an averment in an action of
slander. There is no particular form of words in use. The important matter is that each
substantial fact be so averred as to be susceptible of a simple admission or denial. See
Verify. (WCA1889)

VERIFY - To show to be true; TO CONFIRM BY OATH: as, TO VERIFY AN ACCOUNT, a

petition, A PLEA, BY MAKING OATH TO THE TRUTH OF THE STATEMENT OF THE
FACTS SET FORTH. Whence veriÞcation. Sometimes, TO CONFIRM OR SUBSTANTIATE
BY OATH, sometimes by argument; in legal proceedings generally the former (by oath). A
notary may "verify" a mortgagee's written statement of the amount of his claim, but need not
"authenticate" the act by his seal. "Verify" here means TO SWEAR TO. Compare Aver.
(WCA1889)

NEGATIVE - A DENIAL; a proposition by which something is denied; a statement in the

form of denial. TWO NEGATIVES DO NOT MAKE A GOOD ISSUE. As to negative
"Covenant," "Easement," "Servitude," "Statute," and "Testimony," see those titles. (Black4)

NEGATIVE EVIDENCE - Testimony that AN ALLEGED FACT DID NOT EXIST. (Black4)

NEGATIVE CONDITION - One by which it is stipulated that a given thing shall not happen.
(Black4)

NEGATIVE AVERMENT - As opposed to the traverse or SIMPLE DENIAL of an afÞrmative

allegation, a negative averment is an allegation of some substantive fact, e. g., that premises
are not in repair, which, although negative in FORM, is really afÞrmative in SUBSTANCE,
AND THE PARTY ALLEGING THE FACT OF NON-REPAIR MUST PROVE IT. An
averment in some of the pleadings in a case in which a negative is asserted. (Black4)

—=—

I can deny that I am Clint Richardson, to which the plaintiff must prove I am that which I am not.

Or I can claim that I am a different legal person named John Smith instead of Clint Richardson, in
which case I must prove that I am not Clint Richardson by providing positive evidence that I am in-
deed another Þction not named Clint Richardson. This is a dark legal trap, for to prove one legal
(artiÞcial) thing in error one must afÞrm another artiÞcial legal thing to be positively true, which
means that the legal law over that person, place, or things must also be true. I must embrace Þction
over Reality, choosing a false master over my own Nature (Self). This is against God’s Word. Denial
is a simple negative, whereas claiming or averring a false but legalized truth as existent or non-
existent and authoritative is a negative averment, and so the negative claim of truth must be some-
how positively proven. Therefore, as a general rule, one should do as Jesus did by remaining silent
or speaking parabolically (not personally), never making such types of positive or negative
afÞrmations. For names cannot harm us unless we respect them and claim (afÞrm) they are our
own. But when I claim positively to be Clint Richardson only for the purpose of negatively claiming
or disproving something that did not happen, I now must prove the negative. I have just become
the devil’s advocate, pleading to the devil (attorney in black robe) to account me as the devil’s own.

At this point, we can go back to scripture and see where christ Lived simply and thus negatively in
all things, never claiming to be anything but what was self-evident and simple, and teaching others
to be like-minded. How dare anyone demand that God prove Itself as anything but the I Am. And
as GodÕs Creation, we also are only what we are. All else is Þction. All else is positive. All else must
be proven. The greatest legal trick is to cause the negative man to confess some positive (legally
bound) aspect of his negative standing.

!589
 —=—

“Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual,

restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest
thou also be tempted. BEAR YE ONE ANOTHER'S BURDENS, AND
SO FULFILL THE LAW OF CHRIST. FOR IF A MAN THINK HIMSELF
TO BE SOMETHING, WHEN HE IS NOTHING, HE DECEIVETH
HIMSELF. BUT LET EVERY MAN PROVE HIS OWN WORK, and then
shall he have rejoicing IN HIMSELF ALONE, AND NOT IN
ANOTHER.”
—Galatians 6: 1-4, KJB

—=—

“Ignorance is preferable to error; and HE IS LESS REMOTE FROM THE

TRUTH WHO BELIEVES NOTHING, THAN HE WHO BELIEVES
WHAT IS WRONG.”
—Thomas Jefferson

—=—

It always amuses me to see the look on people’s faces when I tell them that the quotes of their
heroes and false gods are almost always to be found either directly or loosely plagiarized from the
Bible, even when their heroes are enemies. But then much of the Bible is quoted and spiritually
plagiarized from many other more ancient scriptures. And so these tidbits of knowledge eventually
must be left to boil down to the Þlter of Natural reason, to what is self-evident and self-Existent
Truth. To believe in (love) what is no thing of Nature, of Reality, is the epitome of self-deceit.

In these powerful verses we are told how to simply fulÞll the spiritual law. Most importantly, it is
said that we may only prove ourselves by our works, and not by chanted or prayed words in some
false, Þctional name and ritualistic ßattering title. Works are the substance of a negative proof, a
Sabbath Lifestyle, whereas the name and title are merely positive formalities, inventions of the
mind, as empty proofs without works (without self-evidence in Reality). Do not be tempted by the
perceived ease of such positively charged faults and ßatteries, and thus in so doing donÕt pretend
to be some thing you are not. For ultimately, when compared to the artiÞcial world of man, we are
nothing at all. We are Þction-less; invisible. Immune from that artful dis-ease. And so it could be
said that the whole satanic (adversarial) system of man’s artful law is to tempt man unto himself, to
respect the mirror image in a false form and persona more so than the Nature and Source of its
shining, and so to deceive himself in all things by loving (believing/placing faith in) the Þction
over the Reality of all things. Based on this, then it would be fairly accurate to say that our societies
are merely extensions of the fable of hell, where everything we do is in artiÞce and opposed to our
very own Nature and harmful to that of all others.

To speak (verb) positively or negatively, that is the question. We have of course learned in our
public-mindedness that positive is good and negative is bad. But let us not forget that the legal
language deals in Þgurative dualities and opposites, and that a loss or lack of anything positive in
law is a gain and retaining of spirituality. What is positive kills the spirit and pretends to corrupt
the blood. For a legal entity only has a positive existence with positively (Þctionally) created traits.

!590
Let us take for example again the man who calls himself by the ßattering title of ÒscientistÓ through
government permission and licensure compared to the spiritual man who uses the ÒscientiÞc
methodÓ in the Purest of responsibility, respect, and protection of that which he studies. Everything
in Nature certainly has a hidden science (Design) about it, those self-evident characteristics of
Existence and of that which sparks Life Itself. We may either protect our Nature or we may destroy
it utterly with legal license in the ßattering, positive (legal) name of Òscience.Ó

In WebsterÕs 1828 dictionary of the English Language, the word science is deÞned as an ÒART
derived from precepts or built on principles,Ó where ÒSCIENCE PERFECTS GENIUS,Ó and as
ÒAny art or species of knowledge,Ó though with the caveat that ÒNO SCIENCE DOTH MAKE
KNOWN THE FIRST PRINCIPLES ON WHICH IT BUILDETH.Ó For science is of course a noun,
not a verb. And so science perfects the art of evil genius (the actual deÞnition of devil) as well as
sparking that imagination of the well intentioned discoverer. But a science created by man around
anything is an acknowledgement and Þrm ratiÞcation of certain proclaimed facts, not the actual
knowledge. Thus institutionalized science perpetually falls in upon itself, ever-changing in its
conclusions, and always cast aside without apology by the next more popular and modern version
of itself. This continuous metamorphosis of scientiÞc fact (pretended truth) is usually concluded
and brought to syndicalist consensus only after a strict and causal belief in the perfection of exact-
ness of that which was the formerly ÒcurrentÓ science (legally proven facts) of things is used to
justify and give license to some of the most atrocious and horriÞc acts in history.

Sounds a lot like religion, does it not?

As we can imagine, a scientiÞc mind is very much like a man of God, both corrupted in their
innocence by powers that seek to exploit the very Design each man worships. The corporatized,
Romanized denomination of religion despoils the Pure religious intent of man just as the
institutions of licensed ÒscienceÓ despoils the neutrality of genius that causes a man to wish to
discover the beautiful and seemingly chaotic but ultimately harmonic functionality of GodÕs
Nature and Design. The noun (title) always destroys the verb (works); the art only ever able to be a
still picture of the True ßow of Nature. The individual discovery is always false, for the part can
never reveal the Whole Design behind it. But this self-evident Truth does not seem to be a
consideration in manÕs institutionalized syndicate of sciences.

So what about man himself? How does the art alter the course and purpose of man when these
syndicalist institutions in authority over any art become the governor of the law over the Real?
What happens when legalistic, logical discourse ignores any spiritual (True) considerations of the
Source and Reason of the Highest Laws and Law of Nature?

—=—

“And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear
out the saints of the most High, AND THINK TO CHANGE TIMES
AND LAWS…”
—Daniel 7:25, KJB

—=—

A spiritual man is positive about nothing, remaining and acknowledging only in the negative
(organic) state of all things while acting as the instruments and protectors of Nature, not simply
pretending to be Its overlord and corruptor. But a ÒscientistÓ must be strictly positive about every-
thing it (that ßattering title) declares, naming and classifying each part of the whole, though never
fully understanding its Source, even while destroying the very whole to understand the parts. And
yet True science as the study of NatureÕs self-evident Design will only ever reveal that it is only the
whole that should be used in its Purest essence and self-Existent combination despite the appeal or
proÞtability of its parts.

!591
 —=—

“My children, the only True technology is Nature. All the other forms of
man-made technology are perversions. THE ANCIENT DICTATORS
USED TECHNOLOGY TO ENSLAVE THE MASSES…”
—Quoted from the animated, post-apocalyptic movie ‘Wizards’ (1977), written by Ralph Bakshi

—=—

Without positive laws and names (proper words of art), the scientist cannot function in Nature,
while the negative spirit of man simply nurtures that which Is, Was, and shall Be in the permanent
Being of self-Existence (I AM) without proprietary names being necessary. True christ-like behavior
is that of the conscious and thus purposeful preserving of that Life-Force, Its Source and Design as
one’s Highest Law, without feeling the adversarial need to tear it apart and destroy it to positively
discover, register, patent (artful re-invention), and pretend to ÒscientiÞcallyÓ discover and improve
upon its already perfected Natural Design and function. The spiritual man’s only science is his
internally unmolested conscience, as the spiritual awareness of the priceless value and sacriÞce of
all Life and of the only actual Truth, being the protector of that only True Reality. The scientist must
separate everything in Nature from Itself, from its completeness, and into Its speciÞc individually
named (conquered) parts that make up that whole (Source) for study and thus genetic, foundation-
al alteration, as if man can improve upon God’s Permanence of Design without ultimately harming
himself. For he knows that any change is only ever temporary or utterly destructive of that Origin
of Design, and can never thus grow or artiÞcially live without man's help or supplemental action. A
seedless fruit, for instance, is self-evidently not able to Live past its own genetically altered Life, for
it is a creation of man and not of the Source and Design of God. The spiritual man considers all in
Oneness, knowing that it is only the whole that heals and sustains all Life and that all Life Lives on
only because of the balance of that systematic Whole. He never questions the harmony of the
Design but instead Lives gladly and helplessly within Its Law in negative relation, harmoniously
doing no harm except that which is a respectful sacriÞce necessary for some Life to sustain other
Life.

The scientist splits electricity into a separate positive and negative ßow so as to limit and control Its
Original Design ßow capacity to exploit it for his own purposes. Yet the Spirit of Life requires the
Purity of that Source in togetherness and harmony, even as the atmosphere discharges its in-
surmountable and uncontrollable power upon the earth and sea through what scientists call as
ÒlighteningÓ without Truly comprehending the Nature and Design of that Force. For the legal
scientist in mammon, whose personÕs intent and licensed title is towards Þnancial gain and
property ownership instead of beneÞcial scientiÞc discovery in and of itself in the Pure Love of
Charity and Works for the harmony of all of man and his very Nature, his goal is not to share but to
own knowledge via dis-covery and by controlling his re-created and re-purposed art and its name
(proper noun) for patent and sale (extortion towards corporate proÞts and gains). He seeks this
knowledge to beneÞt only himself or the corporation or government he is employed in agency
under, his product of re-creation of Source being only a copy of Nature without an original, a novel,
copyrighted simulacrum of God’s Design. His is the discovery and perversion of Nature without a
spiritual and Life-afÞrming blueprint from its Source, with the sole purpose of causing GodÕs
Creation to become re-sourced into that which is novel (unique) for patentable, commercial,
monopolistic gain. For it is not the man considered as making the discoveries, it is his ßattering title
as an ÒeducatedÓ employee attached to the legal surname of another, and all property is of the
state.

Remember, all that presently Exists in timeless self-evidence under God cannot be patented by man
as a new idea or discovery. Nothing of God’s Creation is patentable, and so all of Nature must be
modiÞed into something adversarial (satanic, opposed) to its Source in order to be controlled and
patented for all person’s permissive use or exclusion. All of Nature must be reorganized and made

!592
false by placing a false, positive legal name and title upon it. Patents do not apply to a private man
who privately uses the idea only for his self without commercially attempting to sell it against
public commercial patent rights, yet another difference between private use and public use. As long
as no money or gain of any type valued in money (property) is made upon the application of the
patented idea, no patented legal law is broken, yet another example of why Charity is the solution
to most problems, while money and the belief (love) of it is almost exclusively the root cause. In that
prostitute of a legal science corporation, the hireling “scientist’s” work is not his own, and yet his
work would be impossible to accomplish in Nature without such a permissive, antichrist legal
setting as ours without the money changers of mammon running his laboratory and funding his
expeditions and experiments with unchecked licensure (anarchy). And so again, money is certainly
the root of all evil, not the least of which is man selling his soul and dignity for a ßattering title
digniÞed only in the Þctional circles of institutionalized art forms (syndicalist corporations). The
scientist’s god is always mammon or some corporation thereof to which he prostitutes himself and
his allotted, educated and papered in ßattering title as a base hireling, just as the priestÕs of corp-
orate religions do. For his work is always funded by the proprietary currency (credit) of a
positively charged monetary system, and often by the syndicalist university system that granted
his graduated diplomacy (diplomatic immunity) of licensed crime in the Þrst place.

In viewing these deÞnitions, remember that what is legal is always opposed to Nature, as some-
thing positively charged (accused and adjudged) or negatively discharged back into non-Existence
(as end of contract).

NEGATIVELY - adverb - 1. With or by denial; as, he answered negatively. 2. In the FORM of

speech IMPLYING THE ABSENCE OF SOMETHING; OPPOSED TO POSITIVELY. I shall
show what this image of god in man is, NEGATIVELY BY SHOWING WHEREIN IT DOES
NOT CONSIST (STAND), and positively, by showing wherein it does consist. 3. Negatively
charged or electriÞed. [See Positively]. (Webs1828)

POSITIVELY - adverb - Absolutely; by itself, independent of any thing else; not

comparatively. Good and evil removed may be esteemed good or evil comparatively, and not
positively or simply. 1. Not negatively; really; IN ITS OWN NATURE; directly;
INHERENTLY. A thing is positively good, when it produces happiness by its own qualities
or operation. IT IS NEGATIVELY GOOD, WHEN IT PREVENTS AN EVIL, OR DOES NOT
PRODUCE IT. 2. Certainly; indubitably. This is POSITIVELY YOUR HANDWRITING. 3.
Directly; explicitly; EXPRESSLY. The witness testiÞed positively to the fact. 4. Peremptorily;
in strong terms. The divine law POSITIVELY requires humility and meekness. 5. WITH
FULL CONFIDENCE OR ASSURANCE. I cannot speak positively in regard to the fact.
Positively electriÞed, in the science of electricity. A body is said to be positively electriÞed
or charged with electric matter, when it contains a superabundance of the ßuid, AND
NEGATIVELY ELECTRIFIED OR CHARGED, WHEN SOME PART OF THE FLUID
WHICH IT NATURALLY CONTAINS, HAS BEEN TAKEN FROM IT. According to other
theorists, when the electric ßuid is directed outwards from a body, the substance is
electriÞed positively; but when it is entering or has a tendency to enter another substance,
the body is supposed to be negatively electriÞed. The two species of electricity attract each
other, and each REPELS ITS OWN KIND. (Webs1828)

POSITIVE - Express; absolute; not doubtful; afÞrmative; direct : as, a positive or positive—
afÞrmation, condition, evidence, fraud, proof, statute, etc. (WCA1889)

POSITIVE LAW - Law actually ORDAINED or ESTABLISHED; statutory regulations;

enacted law, or enactments; THE LEX SCRIPTA. (WCA1889)

—=—

Remember that the original united States constitution (a uniÞcation of several separate, private
Peoples as “States” in compact) in its own words was to positively “ordain and establish” the nation
and Þx absolutely and resolutely its magistracy, and also to distinguish them from all other classes

!593
and slaves. And its legacy is only left to the “posterity” in blood consideration of the Arms
(heraldry) of fabled genealogy, therein reserving exclusive, private right to Bear such tokens over
that of the legal, artiÞcial Arms (ßag and seal) of the United States. Know your place and class and
you will know your law. Know your Self, and no positive law can effect you. Know (be familiar
with, family with) your positively created (constituted) strawman person and its legal creator, and
no law will escape your surety bond to it.

A negative duty repels the transgressions by others who respect the Natural Law. A positive
contractual obligation (positive duty) repels by insurance and protection of the contract (promise)
and the fear of breaking that false law, no matter how tyrannical or harmful. But the negative and
positive can be made to Þt together like hand in glove, just as the negative man is clothed by the
positive legal person. But the positive cannot exist without the negative force and breath of Life
behind it. For what is of the negative realm is of Source.

—=—

“A negative destroys a negative, and both make an afÞrmative.”

—NEGATIO DESTRUIT NEGATIONEM, ET AMBAE FACIUNT AFFIRMATIONEM. Co. Litt. 146b. Lord Coke cites this as a rule of grammatical
construction, not always applying in law. (Black4)

—=—

“A double negative is an afÞrmative.”

—NEGATIO DUPLEX EST AFFIRMATIO. (Black4)

—=—

I cannot be two things at once in Reality, in Nature. I can Be and have only one unifying purpose.
To pretend to be and feign an artiÞcial appearance as some thing when we are in Reality no thing
(we are not a noun in Nature; not a Þctional person, place, or thing) is to act opposed to God’s
Nature and Law, which is to respect no person created by man, no jurisdiction or title created by
man, and nothing of or within the Þctional arts created by man. We are to remain spiritually
negative without addition, which simply translates to telling and excepting no lies, especially from
that domain we call the positive Þction of law under contract.

We must cease living dualistic, double lives, pretending to have one foot in Nature (God) and one
in commerce (mammon). We must stop being two-faced. The second I claim to be anything but that
I Am; that I Exist only in Nature with no other considerations, then whatever else I negatively claim
as an addition to my already negative state is seen as an afÞrmation, and a positive statement must
always be proved, even when it avers only a negative state of Being. One could vulgarly translate
this quite easily into just the simple-to-understand statement of Òjust shut the hell up!Ó very much
as Jesus was sometimes portrayed. No words, no afÞrmations. The parable is a simulation of
silence, a speaking only in negative terms with no legal capacity. We cannot be private and act
publicly at the same time. We cannot reserve our secrets and also be alienated of them in publicity
at the same time. Under GodÕs Word, in Truth, we cannot live double lives. But we doÉ

DOUBLE - adjective - Dubl. [Latin. Gr. See Two.] 1. Two of a sort together; one corresponding
to the other; being in pairs; as double chickens in the same egg; double leaves connected by
one petiole. 2. Twice as much; containing the same quantity or length repeated. Take double
money in your hand. Genesis 43:12. Let a double portion of thy spirit be on me. 2 Kings 2:9.
With to; as, the amount is double to what I expected. 3. Having one added to another; as a
double chin. 4. Twofold; also, of two kinds. Darkness and tempest make a double night. 5.
Two in number; as double sight or sound. [See No. 1.] 6. DECEITFUL; ACTING TWO PARTS, 




!594
 ONE OPENLY, THE OTHER IN SECRET. And with DOUBLE HEART do they speak.
Psalms 12:2. - adverb - Dubl. Twice. I was double their age. Double, in composition, denotes,
two ways, or twice the number or quantity. (Webs1828)

NEGATION - Denial. Two negations are construed to mean ONE AFFIRMATION.

(Bouv1856)

NEGATIVE - This word has several signiÞcations. 1. It is used IN CONTRADISTINCTION

TO GIVING ASSENT; thus we say the president has put his negative upon such a bill. Vide
VETO. 2. It is also used IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO AFFIRMATIVE; as, A NEGATIVE
DOES NOT ALWAYS ADMIT OF THE SIMPLE AND DIRECT PROOF OF WHICH AN
AFFIRMATIVE IS CAPABLE. WHEN A PARTY AFFIRMS A NEGATIVE IN HIS
PLEADINGS, AND WITHOUT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF WHICH, BY EVIDENCE, HE
CANNOT RECOVER OR DEFEND HIMSELF, THE BURDEN OF THE PROOF LIES UPON
HIM, AND HE MUST PROVE THE NEGATIVE. Although as a general rule the
AFFIRMATIVE of every ISSUE must be PROVED, YET THIS RULE CEASES TO OPERATE
THE MOMENT THE PRESUMPTION OF LAW IS THROWN INTO THE OTHER SCALE.
WHEN THE ISSUE IS ON THE LEGITIMACY OF A CHILD, THEREFORE, IT IS
INCUMBENT ON THE PARTY ASSERTING THE ILLEGITIMACY TO PROVE IT. Vide
AfÞrmative Innocence. (Bouv1856)

NEATNESS - Pleading. The statement, in apt and appropriate words, OF ALL THE
NECESSARY FACTS, AND NO MORE. (Bouv1856)

NEAT or NET - Contracts. THE EXACT WEIGHT OF AN ARTICLE, without the bag, box,
keg, OR OTHER THING IN WHICH IT MAY BE ENVELOPED. (Bouv1856)

ENVELOPED - participle passive - Inwrapped; covered on all sides; surrounded on all sides;
inclosed. (Webs1828)

ENVELOP - verb transitive - 1. To cover by wrapping of FOLDING; to inwrap; TO INVEST

WITH A COVERING (i.e. HOOD). Animal bodies are usually enveloped with skin; the
merchant envelops goods with canvas; a letter is enveloped with paper. 2. To surround
entirely; to cover on all sides; to hide. A ship was enveloped in fog; the troops were
enveloped in dust. 3. To line; to cover on the inside… (Webs1828)

DECK - verb transitive - 1. Primarily, to cover; to overspread; TO PUT ON. Hence, 2. TO

CLOTHE; TO DRESS THE PERSON; but usually, to clothe with more than ordinary
elegance; to array; TO ADORN; to embellish. The dew with spangles decked the ground. 3.
TO FURNISH WITH A DECK AS A VESSEL. - noun - 1. The covering of a SHIP…
(Webs1828)

—=—

In the legal realm all things must be proven to positively exist. But when the presumption of law is
upon the negative aspect of that which a positive status or law is attempted to be clothed upon,
namely a man or property, the positive law is thwarted. Only when a negative is used to prove that
negative quality does the negative then need to be proven somehow positively so as to prove the
other negative. Paradox… This gets confusing even for myself, and goes to show the Beauty of that
simplicity of GodÕs Nature and Son (Word). To Live a simple Life is to always avoid artiÞce, never
positively conÞrming or ratifying any thing that is a design of man nor clothing it in false authority.

Bottom line: the Truly innocent man need never positively (legally) prove his innocence, for his
innocence is his very lack of legal capacity. Innocence is not a positive state of Existence, but a total
absence of legally (artiÞcially) provable qualities. This reborn state is shown only through our
actions, never through words. The innocent man is incapable of holding a positive (legal) charge
(name, title, number, mark, sign).

!595
These are the most devastating aspects of the legal indoctrination of men into Þction, for in the end
we are screwing ourselves, wirelessly plugging ourselves into the legal matrix every time we
idiotically speak in dog-Latin while positively acting under the opposing, legalistic terms of art.
And this is the epitome of what the scriptural teachings warn against, of manÕs fall into Þction,
which is to say that only a man not learned in, following, and heeding the warnings of scripture
and in fear of not doing so (the fear of God) could be tricked into this folly of personhood under the
positive law of man. It is our own continued, individual use of the strawman, its signature, its legal
ability and capacity positively permitted to enter into contract by its agent, and its beneÞts of social
(public) security and other protective and obligatory beneÞts under Title 42 of US Code that
conÞrms each of our choices to stay in mammon once adult-hood is reached; that consenting legal
hood of permissive, legally licensed adultery.

An abandoned child is not ratiÞed into the district (seizure) of government, for it has no ability or
consideration to do so until it is of the age of consent. It is adopted. This adoption lies as a status
purely voidable by the parents throughout the life of the infant until that age of consent (or
ratiÞcation) is reached, for which we call adult-hood; the state of a grown-up bastard that can then
choose his own adulterous ways through legal licensing and educative indoctrination via
syndicalistic diploma (reward) and debt while still remaining an infant of unknown parentage.
Hell, we can even voluntarily join the infantry when we are in full, voluntary adulthood (legally
licensed adultery).

PARENTAGE - noun - EXTRACTION; BIRTH; CONDITION WITH RESPECT TO THE

RANK OF PARENTS; as a man of MEAN parentage; a gentleman of NOBLE parentage.
(Webs1828)

—=—

To be clear, this Þctionally acquired status of illegitimate or ÒunknownÓ parentage by legal

marriage (of persons) has nothing to do with Nature, existing only as a positive, public legal status.
The birth certiÞcate and registration process can only reßect what the actual parent believes is the
legal truth (Þction) about his or her own status in persona, but a person is only ever a legal entity,
and a birth certiÞcate only ever the creation of another legal entity. The tie of blood cannot ever be
extinguished in Reality under God, only by the legal consideration of these false legal gods of
nobility in their own Þctional realm and con game; those privateering cheaters. It is only belief and
positive consent by man through his own legal claim and signature as conÞrmation to such artiÞce
that causes this birth condition of rank to express itself with any legal authority. The record
(registration) of original birth sin and taxation must be corrected. Persons, not men, are borne of
original sin (birthed as the son of a Þctional nation in disrespect of blood ancestry). Men may only
pretend to clothe themselves within that artiÞcial matrix (womb) of personhood so as to partake in
that sin. We must become negative by killing the positive aspects of that which is attached to us
legally in persona. For these are the positive ingredients that make up the strawman, our surety to
it relying upon our belief in (love of) its legitimacy and debt. But we must also remember that only
by acting in christÕs name according to GodÕs Word (Son) may we be able to remain in such a Pure
state of Being, by following that Law of Nature that christ exempliÞed. We must manifest our Self
only as christ did, purely and without lies. We must have only one God, one Master. We must never
volunteer, for a man acting in True Love and Charity has no use for volunteerism. His whole Life is
already Lived by it, in and by motives stemming from only Pure Love and Charity, and so it need
not be made into a noun, made ofÞcial. He needs no badge or state identiÞcation, for his works
display his Life without words, ßattering titles, or approvals from the state. He needs no such term
of art or title to act religiously in the spirit of his moral, Highest Law. The term ÒvolunteerÓ as a
noun, in other words, is redundant and pointless when one's whole Life (Existence) is devoted to
GodÕs Word (Son) and preservation of Its Law and Nature. In the legal society, a ÒvolunteerÓ is
merely a ßattering title used for resumeÕs, job and school applications, and other forms of guilt and
empty show.

!596
The continued use and conduct of a man in that Þctional personhood “without exercising the right to
relieve himself from its obligations” is considered as a legal conÞrmation and ratiÞcation of that tacitly
consented to contractual relationship, making that fraud which is voidable into that which is an
unavoidable obligation of performance towards artiÞce in mammon. The adoption thus becomes a
ratiÞcation of artiÞcial paternity in this state and jurisdiction of legalized adultery. The nation and
no other is the parent of its own Þctional personas.

A lie is only as powerful as the projected temptation it promotes to be used.

—=—

ÒRatiÞcation is equivalent to EXPRESS COMMAND.”




—RATIHABITIO MANDATO AEQUIPARATUR. Dig. 46, 3, 12, 4; Broom, Max. -867; Palmer v. Yates, 3 Sandf. (N.Y.) 151. (Black4)

—=—

For those who might claim that all of this is ÒfraudÓ and so therefore not lawful, consider again that
one who voluntarily acts in the ÒfraudÓ and illegitimacy of legal personhood cannot claim his own
actions to be fraudulent, nor that of his principal (government) in this agency relation-ship, one
stands in the conÞrmed fraud of personhood through oneÕs own expressive (consensual) actions
thereof as unaccepted and expressly consented to ÒfraudÓ until one is ready to void ALL such
fraudulent relations, rights, privileges, beneÞts, and any other form of contractual obligations to
that Òfraud.Ó One must relinquish the apparently good things with the known bad things to void in
totality said fraud. One cannot have two masters, two gods, and so the legal beneÞts, wealth, and
property in mammon must especially be relinquished as they are merely inducements to contract.
Just as the rock star must sell his soul to the devil (evil genius) to become famous, so too must the
citizen sell his soul to acquire Social Security and other beneÞts and pensions. These beneÞts are
literally too good to be True for being the result of contacted dis-ease. For to receive such goodness
one must accept all the badness, allowing for the most horrid atrocities and murderous destruction
of man and Nature to be committed in oneÕs name, so as to protect the very legal Þction that allows
such un-Natural and un-Godly beneÞts, comforts, and wealth at the expense of others. This is a
shameful inequity that no man can deny. It is the epitome of satanism, labeled with such patriotic
sounding nouns as ÒpatriotismÓ and ÒAmerican exceptionalism.Ó It is sometimes even called
ofÞcially as ÒequityÓ or Òequality,Ó a disgusting example of the Truly evil nature of legalese.

One simply cannot trade lightness for darkness if one wishes to subsist in an enlightened state of
Being. This is called solution, an end of all contacts of debt, and there is no other way to solve this
issue (birth). In this way, a man must be prepared to give up all artiÞcial things, everything he
thinks he ÒownsÓ in person (on paper), for such avoidance to take place. What is gained by the
legal ÒpublicÓ persona in contract of mammon is not a gain of the man, only of the principal for
which the man acts in the agency (bondage) thereof.

This conÞrmation and ratiÞcation process is also known as a bargaining. The state gains control of
the ÒchildÓ (as property) both through the birth certiÞcation process (registration/tax) and by the
brainwashing of the parents that so informed upon their own ßesh and blood. About 16 and 18
years later that adulterous child conÞrms that sale at his or her age of consent, when he elects to
continue using, identifying, personifying, and claiming the positive law beneÞts, permits, licenses,
laws, and scholarships of Caesar for himself (in persona) while acting as the strawman in the hood
of adultery (surety). We are barred from our Natural, paternal property (actual baby) in lieu of
mere use in maternal guardian-ship through the birth abandonment process.

BARGAIN - noun - An agreement between parties concerning the sale of property; or a

contract by which one party binds himself TO TRANSFER THE RIGHT TO SOME
PROPERTY, for a consideration, and the other party BINDS HIMSELF TO RECEIVE THE
PROPERTY AND PAY THE CONSIDERATION. 2. Stipulation: interested dealing. 


!597
 3. PURCHASE OR THE THING PURCHASED. 4. In popular language, FINAL EVENT;
upshot. We must make the best of a bad bargain. To sell bargains, is a vulgar phrase. TO
STRIKE A BARGAIN IS TO RATIFY AN AGREEMENT, originally by striking, or shaking
hands. The Latin ferire foedus, may represent a like ceremony, unless it refers to the practice of
killing a victim, at the SOLEMN RATIFICATION OF OATHS. Bargain and sale, in law, a
species of conveyance, by which the bargainer contracts to convey the LANDS to the
bargainee, AND BECOMES BY SUCH CONTRACT A TRUSTEE FOR AND SEISED TO
THE USE OF THE BARGAINEE. The statute then completes the purchase; that is, the bargain
vests the USE, and the statute vests the POSSESSION. - verb intransitive - TO MAKE A
CONTRACT OR CONCLUSIVE AGREEMENT, FOR THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY;
often with for before the thing purchased; as, to bargain for a house. A bargained with B for
his farm. - verb transitive - To sell; to transfer for a consideration; as, A BARGAINED AWAY
HIS FARM; a popular use of the word. (Webs1828)

—=—

As a man may bargain away his farm, so too may a man bargain away his child. For the bargain is
words on paper, the name and title of the actual thing, not the substantial Reality. This is also called
as wager. The word lay (lie) also includes the word wager (e.g., from WebsterÕs deÞnition above,
meaning: LAY (noun): 2. A bet; a wager. 3. Station; rank). A simple rule is this: a legal gain always
favors the Bar association, its attorney members, and its principal government. Bar-gain. But before
we discuss this further, let us speak to the wager that is the birth process and subsequent civil life
(ad-venture) expected to take place, where the government wagers through contract that the child
(in legal persona) will grow to be a proÞtable asset (as government live-stock) in agency under
human capital management. In return, the state purchases (conquers) the vital statistics (false
persona) and presumes surety of that child (legal entity) with the offered “social contract” and false
valuation of security and legal protections that only a Þctional, surrogate father under a public
family and law (artiÞcial womb/matrix) could provide. But the stipulation is that one must
abandon Jehovah to do so, giving up all Natural Rights in the process in exchange for only legal
rights of persons (the property of the state).

In Roman law, we Þnd a similar form of distress (districting) that fulÞlls the modern derivation of
this ancient system of pledging ourselves and our children in seizure at birth to the Caesar (the
gods of the nations).

PIGNORIS CAPIO - Latin. In Roman law. This was the name of one of the legis actiones. It
was employed only in certain particular kinds of pecuniary cases, and consisted in that the
creditor, without preliminary suit and without the co-operation of the magistrate, by
reciting a prescribed formula, TOOK AN ARTICLE OF PROPERTY FROM THE DEBTOR
TO BE TREATED AS A PLEDGE OR SECURITY. The proceeding bears a marked analogy
to DISTRESS at common law. (Black4)

PIGNUS - Latin. In the civil law. A PLEDGE OR PAWN; A DELIVERY OF A THING TO A

CREDITOR, AS SECURITY FOR A DEBT. Also A THING DELIVERED to a creditor as
security for a debt. (Black4)

PIGNORATIO - Latin. In the civil law. THE CONTRACT OF PLEDGE; AND ALSO THE
OBLIGATION OF SUCH CONTRACT. Sealing up (obsignatio). A shutting up of AN
ANIMAL CAUGHT IN ONE'S FIELD and keeping it till the expenses and damage have
been paid by its master. (Black4)

PIGNORATIVE CONTRACT - In the civil law. A CONTRACT OF PLEDGE, hypothecation,

or MORTGAGE OF REALTY. (Black4)

—=—

!598
We must comprehend that the gods like to play war and commerce games with their pawns. They
like to gamble. Our future performance in legal persona, as qualiÞed by our ability to perform in
capita via future labor potential as commercial vessels, is the nature of their wager. In that light, the
notion of free-roaming (enfranchised) slaves is akin to a bet placed upon the performance of a man
virtually chained in surety to a false legal persona, and is very similar to a sports book betting
structure in horse racing. It is a very likely bet that all horses in the race will Þnish that race without
breaking free of their harnesses or realizing they are being used as pawns in a game and as the
subjects of commercial wagers, and so bets may be made at varying ratios of return and with
insurance and reinsurance on the principal’s investment in his agent (horse and jockey). After all,
the horses will never be taught the language of their masters, and so their enslavement appears and
is presumed inevitable. Likewise, most men will continue to act in their assigned name and
number throughout said legal ad-venture and commercial under-taking within the bondage of
surety in persona, reaching that unavoidable Þnal destination of a Natural death while still
harnessed in the artiÞcial civil life of citizen-ship, meaning that civil and Natural death will of
course occur simultaneously, thus insuring that all insured bets of value in human capitalization
are covered and policies paid. All bets are covered in seigniorage, and the house never loses. The
man in commercial citizen-ship will most likely stay saddled to the state’s offered persona, and will
run the gamut (obstacle course) of that legal, commercial path. From his commercial birth
certiÞcation through to the Þnish line of commercial death certiÞcation, the gods can rest assured
(insurance) that their persons will run the proÞtable inter-course put in front of them, constantly
trying to jockey for a better position of employment among the vulgar mass of illiterates. And all
the time we pay tribute (tax) to our master like dividends on a stock. This is the human race,
delusional men driven by the perceived but artiÞcial value of money and what it may purchase
(conquer), yet never comprehending that nothing is actually their own. For they have no foothold
upon the land they permissively tread upon or purchased with government-owned money in the
registered property of their false persona.

WAGE - In old English practice. To give SECURITY for the PERFORMANCE of a THING.
(Black4)

WAGER - A CONTRACT by which two or more parties agree that A CERTAIN SUM OF
MONEY OR OTHER THING shall be paid or DELIVERED to one of them or that they shall
gain or lose ON THE HAPPENING OF AN UNCERTAIN EVENT or upon the ascertainment
of a fact in dispute, WHERE THE PARTIES HAVE NO INTEREST IN THE EVENT EXCEPT
THAT ARISING FROM THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH GAIN OR LOSS. It was said that
contract giving one party or the other an option to carry out the transaction or not at
pleasure is not invalid as a "wager." But if, under guise of contract of sale, real intent of both
parties is merely to speculate in rise or fall of prices and property is not to be delivered, but at
time Þxed for delivery one party is to pay difference between contract price and market price,
transaction is invalid as “wager." (Black4)

WAGER OF LAW - In old practice. The giving of gage or SURETIES by a defendant in an

action OF DEBT that at a certain day assigned HE WOULD MAKE HIS LAW; that is, would
take an oath in open court that HE DID NOT OWE THE DEBT, and at the same time bring
with him eleven neighbors, (called "compurgators,") who should avow upon their oaths that
they believed in their consciences that he said the truth. (Black4)

WAGER OF BATTEL - The trial by wager of battel was a species of trial introduced into
England, among other Norman customs, by William the Conqueror, in which the person
accused fought with his accuser, UNDER THE APPREHENSION THAT HEAVEN WOULD
GIVE THE VICTORY TO HIM WHO WAS IN THE RIGHT. It was abolished by St. 59 Geo.
III., c. 46. (Black4)

WAGERING CONTRACT - One in which the parties stipulate that they shall gain or lose,
upon the happening of an UNCERTAIN EVENT, in which they have no interest except that
arising from the possibility of such gain or loss. (Black4)

!599
 WAGER POLICY - See Policy of INSURANCE. (Black4)

WAGES - A compensation given to A HIRED PERSON for his or her services; THE
COMPENSATION AGREED UPON BY A MASTER TO BE PAID TO A SERVANT, or any
other PERSON HIRED to do work or business for him. Every form of remuneration payable
for a given period to an individual for personal services, including salaries, commissions,
vacation pay, dismissal wages, bonuses and reasonable value of board, rent, housing, lodging,
payments in kind, tips, and any other similar advantage received from the individual's
employer or directly with respect to work for him. In a limited sense the word "wage" means
pay given for labor usually manual or mechanical at short stated intervals as distinguished
from salary, but in general the word means that which is PLEDGED or paid for work or
other services; hire: pay. In its legal sense, the word "wages" means the price paid for labor,
REWARD of labor. SpeciÞed sum for a given time of service or a Þxed sum for a speciÞed
piece of work. “Three factors contribute to the production of commodities, nature, labor, and
capital. Each must have a share of the product as its reward, and this share, if it is just, must
be proportionate to the several contributions. THE SHARE OF THE NATURAL AGENTS IS
RENT; THE SHARE OF LABOR, WAGES; THE SHARE OF CAPITAL, INTEREST. The clerk
receives a salary; the lawyer and doctor, fees; the manufacturer, proÞts. Salary, fees, and proÞts
are so many forms of wages for services rendered.” (In) Maritime Law: The compensation
allowed to seamen for their services ON BOARD A VESSEL DURING A VOYAGE. (In)
Political Economy: The reward paid, whether in money or goods, to human exertion,
considered as a factor in the production of wealth, for its co-operation in the process.
(Black4)

SEIGNIORAGE - noun - A royal right or prerogative of the king of England, by which he

claims an allowance of gold and silver brought in the mass to be exchanged for coin.
(Webs1828)

SEIGNIOR - In its general signiÞcation, means "lord," but in law it is particularly applied to
the lord of a fee or of a manor; and the fee, dominions, or manor of a seignior is thence
termed a "seigniory," i,e., a lordship. He who is a lord, but of no manor, and therefore unable
to keep a court, is termed a "seignior in gross." Seignior or Seigneur. Among the feudists, this
name signiÞed lord of the fee. Seigneur is still used in French Canada. The most extended
signiÞcation of this word includes not only a lord or peer of parliament, BUT IS APPLIED
TO THE OWNER OR PROPRIETOR OF A THING, hence the owner of a hawk, AND THE
MASTER OF A FISHING VESSEL, is called a seigneur. (Black4)

SEIGNIORY - In English law. A lordship; a manor. The rights of a lord, as such, IN LANDS.
(Black4)

SEIGNIORAGE - A ROYALTY OR PREROGATIVE OF THE SOVEREIGN, whereby an

allowance of gold and silver, brought in the mass to be exchanged for coin, is claimed.
MINTAGE; the CHARGE for coining bullion into money AT THE MINT. (Black4)

—=—

Mostly unknown to the American public, every paper dollar created (minted) and placed into
circulation is charged over a $0.50 cent tax of Òseigniorage,Ó according to the US Mint’s full audit,
the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). This charge is what is then collected as that
un-payable interest on every dollar printed, also known as the “national debt.” If every dollar
carries over a 50% tax upon its creation compounded with permanently increasing interest, then
how can that debt ever be paid without printing more dollars with more tax into inÞnity? Trick
question. It can’t. And that’s the point! This is the astounding prerogative of being in imaginary,
legal “sovereignty.” Debt-slavery is a performance contract in legal hell, where all roads (virtual
waterways) lead to the treasury of hell, where the devilmasters (attorneys and accountants) of
admiralty and of pirate booty rule with the persuasion found only in the art of numbers
(symbology).

!600
When a person is hired by a corporation, the corporation is wagering a bet that the man in surety to
that person will perform the required labor, etc. His contract of employment (agreement to be used)
is also a waiver of certain other rights. It is an agreement to be used (prostituted) in labor and be
paid in debt (money/IOU). For what man does not realize in his daily grind is that to be paid in
money is to be cursed, for the man that holds money so sacred that he would abandon his Self and
his God in such a devil’s (evil genius’s) contract for its pursuit changes the meaning of the word
sacred again to cursed. He foolishly trades his labor for money that he may only spend in the
company store (nation) and its corporations, and is taxed for such a right to “freely” conduct that
commerce in franchise (citizen-ship).

WAIVE - verb - To abandon or throw away; as when a thief, in his ßight, throws aside the
stolen goods, in order to facilitate his escape, he is technically said to waive them. In modern
law, TO ABANDON, throw away, renounce, repudiate, OR SURRENDER A CLAIM, a
privilege, a right, or the opportunity to take advantage of some defect, irregularity, or wrong.
A person is said to waive a beneÞt when he renounces or disclaims it, and he is said to waive
a tort or injury when he abandons the remedy which the law gives him for it. In order for
one to "waive" a right, he must do it knowingly and be possessed of the facts. (Black4)

WAIVE - noun - In old English law. A WOMAN OUTLAWED. The term is, as it were, THE
FEMININE OF "OUTLAW," the latter being always applied to a man; "waive," to a woman.
(Black4)

WAIVE - noun - A WOMAN PUT OUT OF THE PROTECTION OF THE LAW. (Webs1828)

WAIF - Waifs are GOODS FOUND, BUT CLAIMED BY NOBODY; THAT OF WHICH
EVERY ONE WAIVES THE CLAIM. Also, goods stolen and waived, or thrown away by the
thief in his ßight, for fear of being apprehended. Waifs are to be distinguished from bona
fugitiva, which are the goods of the felon himself, which he abandons in his ßight from
justice. (Black4)

LYING IN FRANCHISE - A term descriptive of WAIFS, wrecks, estrays, and the like,
WHICH MAY BE SEIZED WITHOUT SUIT OR ACTION. (Black4)

—=—

And so what happens when the mother signs the vital statistics form as a certiÞcation of birth of
her child to the state? Quite simply, she presumably abandons (de-livers) her paternity rights and
becomes the mere appointed guardian assigned by the state. For her child is considered by law as
transferable “goods.” This is sometimes written as services rendered on invoices, where the act of
caring for legal, public “children” as persons is labeled and described as the commercial venture
(business) of “maintaining commercial and industrial machinery and equipment” from some department
of Òhuman resources.Ó Goods are deÞned as, Òmovables,” and, “may include animals” (WCA1889).

Remember, an ÒanimalÓ in several places in the United States code is deÞned as, Òman and other
animals.Ó To the state, a child borne (carried) in nativity (legally registered and certiÞed as birthed
in the nation) is only movable property (a legal thing of status), an animal to be found, wagered,
insured, and exacted from as human capital. Causing man to abandon his only True property in
Nature, his own children as blood heirs, so that they can be found as treasure (prize) abandoned
upon the sea of commerce and so corrupted (attainted); this is the pirate way.

Trickery and deceit is the way of the pirate’s government (mind control), a system solely created to
protect the creators and posterity of the federal pirate cove that all United States citizen-ships
(public persons) are a creation of.

!601
 —=—

“Enemies are those with whom we declare war, or who declare it against
us; all others are traitors or PIRATES.”
—HOSTES SUNT QUI NOBIS VEL QUIBUS NOS BELLUM DECERNIMUS; CAETERI PRODITORES VEL PRAEDONES SUNT. 7 Coke, 24. (Black4)

—=—

“Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will
never be uprooted.”

“Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Jewish communist leader of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia that killed many tens of millions. (Separate quotes)

—=—

The Natural mother waives her rights with a waiver called a certiÞed Òrecord of live birthÓ and the
resulting birth certiÞcate is like a receipt (proof of purchase) of that event and legal fact that the
child was abandoned to be found as treasure by the state. Thus the childÕs Òpaternal statusÓ
becomes that of its legal purchaser acting by the doctrine of parens patriae. The state becomes the
legal parent, the Real parent (man) taking only 2nd place in authority to the state, for all registered
property is a possession of the state. As with all Roman doctrines, the United States abuses this
power at every turn for its own interest. And so for all public citizenships out there, please know
that the following applies to you and your child in false persona, the one you informed upon at
birth and volunteered ignorantly through unilateral contract to waive all parentage rights of
ownership of your own children (an Act of God) in the undertaking of a wager with the
devilmasters of the state (a legal act of false creation).

PARENS PATRIAE - [Latin, PARENT OF THE COUNTRY.] A doctrine that grants the
inherent power and authority of the state to protect PERSONS who are LEGALLY unable to
act on their own behalf. The parens patriae doctrine has its roots in English Common Law. In
FEUDAL times various obligations and powers, collectively referred to as the "royal
prerogative," were reserved to the king. The king exercised these functions in HIS ROLE OF
FATHER OF THE COUNTRY. IN THE UNITED STATES, THE PARENS PATRIAE
DOCTRINE HAS HAD ITS GREATEST APPLICATION IN THE TREATMENT OF
CHILDREN, mentally ill persons, and other individuals who are LEGALLY
INCOMPETENT to manage their affairs. THE STATE IS THE SUPREME GUARDIAN OF
ALL CHILDREN WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION, AND STATE COURTS HAVE THE
INHERENT POWER TO INTERVENE TO PROTECT THE BEST INTERESTS OF
CHILDREN whose welfare is jeopardized by controversies between parents. This inherent
power is generally supplemented by legislative acts that deÞne the scope of CHILD
PROTECTION in a state. The state, acting as parens patriae, can make decisions regarding
mental health treatment on behalf of one who is mentally incompetent to make the decision on
his or her own behalf, but the extent of the state's intrusion is limited to reasonable and
necessary treatment. The doctrine of parens patriae has been expanded in the United States to
permit the attorney general of a state to commence litigation for the beneÞt of state residents
for federal antitrust violations (15 U.S.C.A. ¤ 15c). This authority is intended to further the
public trust, safeguard the general and economic welfare of a state's residents, protect
residents from illegal practices, and assure that the beneÞts of federal law are not denied to the
general population. STATES MAY ALSO INVOKE PARENS PATRIAE TO PROTECT
INTERESTS SUCH AS THE HEALTH, COMFORT, AND WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE,
interstate Water Rights, AND THE GENERAL ECONOMY OF THE STATE. For a state to

!602
have standing to sue under the doctrine, it must be more than a nominal party without a real
interest of its own and must articulate an interest apart from the interests of particular private
parties. Cross-references: Antitrust Law; Child Abuse; Children's Rights; Infants. (West’s
Encyclopedia of American Law, 2nd Edition)

PARENS PATRIAE - (paa-wrens pat-tree-eye) - noun - Latin for "FATHER OF HIS

COUNTRY," the term for THE DOCTRINE THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS THE
ULTIMATE GUARDIAN OF ALL PEOPLE UNDER A DISABILITY, ESPECIALLY
CHILDREN, WHOSE CARE IS ONLY "ENTRUSTED" TO THEIR PARENTS. Under this
doctrine, in a divorce action or a guardianship application THE COURT RETAINS
JURISDICTION until the child is 18 years old, AND A JUDGE MAY CHANGE CUSTODY,
child support or other rulings affecting the child's well-being, NO MATTER WHAT THE
PARENTS MAY HAVE AGREED OR THE COURT PREVIOUSLY DECIDED. (See: divorce,
custody, child support, guardian, ward). (Farley Free Dictionary online, Gerald N. Hill and
Kathleen T. Hill.)

PARENS PATRIAE - THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT TO ASSUME

RESPONSIBILITY for the welfare of those otherwise unprovided for, such as children or
lunatics, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE IS STATUTORY POWER. (Collins Dictionary
of Law, W.J. Stewart, 2006)

ASSUME - TO TAKE to or upon one's self. See Assumpsit. A person who “assumes a lease”
TAKES TO HIMSELF OR ACCEPTS THE OBLIGATIONS AND THE BENEFITS OF THE
LESSOR UNDER THE CONTRACT. “Assumed” may be used in the sense of CLAIMED; as,
in saying that assumed facts must be proved before the main fact can be inferred." Compare:
Presume. (WCA1889)

PARENS PATRIAE - Father of the country. In England, THE SOVEREIGN; in the United
States; THE STATE. THE SOVEREIGN IS THEORETICALLY GUARDIAN OVER ALL
INFANTS and committee over all lunatics. AS MUCH OF THE ROYAL PREROGATIVE AS
BELONGED TO THE KING IN HIS CAPACITY OF UNIVERSAL TRUSTEE ENTERS
INTO OUR POLITICAL STATE AS INTO THE PRINCIPLES OF THE BRITISH
CONSTITUTION. (WCA1889)


PARENT - The lawful father, or the mother, of another PERSON. Compare Parens.
(WCA1889)

PARENS - Latin. A parent; A FATHER. (WCA1889)

IN LOCO PARENTIS - (Latin). IN THE PLACE OF THE PARENT. Said of A PERSON

INVESTED WITH THE RIGHTS AND CHARGED WITH THE DUTIES OF THE PARENT
OF A CHILD, as, a GUARDIAN, and, in some sense, A TEACHER, AND THE FACULTY
OF A SCHOOL. (WCA1889)


WAIVER - THE INTENTIONAL OR VOLUNTARY RELINQUISHMENT OF A KNOWN

RIGHT; or such conduct as warrants an inference of the relinquishment of such right, or
when one dispenses with the performance of something he is entitled to exact or when one
in possession of any right, whether conferred by law or by contract, with full knowledge of
the material facts, does or forbears to do something the doing of which or the failure of
forbearance to do which is inconsistent with the right, or his intention to rely upon it. The
renunciation, repudiation, abandonment, or SURRENDER OF SOME CLAIM, RIGHT,
PRIVILEGE, or of the opportunity to take advantage of some defect, irregularity, or wrong.
A doctrine resting upon an equitable principle, which courts of law will recognize. See, also,
Estoppel. “Waiver” is essentially UNILATERAL, resulting as legal consequence from some
act or conduct of party against whom it operates, and no act of party in whose favor it is
made is necessary to complete it, AND MAY BE SHOWN BY ACTS AND CONDUCT AND

!603
 SOMETIMES BY NONACTION. Waiver is distinguished from "estoppel" in that in "waiver"
the essential element is AN ACTUAL INTENT TO ABANDON OR SURRENDER A RIGHT,
while in "estoppel" such intent is immaterial; the necessary condition being the
DECEPTION to his injury of the other party by the conduct of the one estopped. And
"estoppel" may result though party estopped DID NOT INTEND TO LOSE ANY
EXISTING RIGHTS. Insurance Law - Substance of doctrine of "waiver" in insurance law is
that if insurer, with knowledge of facts which would bar existing primary liability, recognizes
such primary liability by treating policy as in force, it will not thereafter be allowed to plead
such facts to avoid its primary liability… (Black4)

EXPRESS WAIVER - THE VOLUNTARY, INTENTIONAL RELINQUISHMENT OF A

KNOWN RIGHT. (Black4)

IMPLIED WAIVER - A waiver is implied WHERE ONE PARTY HAS PURSUED SUCH A
COURSE OF CONDUCT WITH REFERENCE TO THE OTHER PARTY AS TO EVIDENCE
AN INTENTION TO WAIVE HIS RIGHTS OR THE ADVANTAGE TO WHICH HE MAY
BE ENTITLED, or where the conduct pursued is inconsistent with any other honest
intention than an intention of such waiver, provided that the other party concerned has been
induced by such conduct TO ACT UPON THE BELIEF that there has been a waiver, and has
incurred trouble or expense thereby. To make out a case of implied "waiver" of a legal right,
there must be a clear, unequivocal and decisive act of the party showing such purpose, or
acts amounting to an estoppel on his part. (Black4)

—=—

To better understand this state-as-father-Þgure concept, we must remember the source of our
person-hood. The United States is father (creator) of its persons, just as the State is father of its own
private People. We read…

—=—

“It is no part of a State’s ‘duty or power,’ said the Court in

Massachusetts v. Mellon, 978 ‘to enforce [her citizens] rights in respect
to their RELATIONS with the Federal Government. In that Þeld, IT IS
THE UNITED STATES AND NOT THE STATE WHICH REPRESENTS
THEM AS PARENS PATRIAE when such representation becomes
appropriate; and to the former, and not to the latter, they must look for
such protective measures as ßow from that STATUS.’”
—‘The State as Parens Patriae: Controversies Between a State and Citizens of Another State,’ from Justia US Law website

—=—

Perhaps the most unbelievable aspect of this equation, that of how in the hell the state claims the
highest authority of parentage over the child of any public citizen-ship that registered and certiÞed
a legal birth event, is the fact that in view of the law the child follows the status (personhood) of the
natural parent (person).

GENUS - Latin. Kind; class; nature. (WCA1889)

GENUINE - Belonging to the ORIGINAL KIND or STOCK; NATIVE; hence, not false,
Þctitious, simulated, spurious, or counterfeit; as, a genuine note. (WCA1889)

—=—

!604
The private People are legally considered as genuine, as the blood heirs and decedents in posterity
of the original People who constituted the States and the compact of the nation. They are pretended
and likened to gods. United States citizenships are of the lowest but “equal” genus of public
servitude to those private, genuine People. This status is created at birth.

The father that was registered as a voluntary slave in public citizenship at his own birth and con-
Þrmed and ratiÞed his own said status (strawman) in adultery (adulthood) cannot register (tax) his
own issue (child) as any legal thing higher than that same legal status in rank and class (genus) than
his own persona (status). But more to the point, a public person that marries another public person,
thereby adjoining legal surnames in a familial incorporation by permit of the state, has no capacity
in any way for legitimacy of blood. Public persons have no blood. Publicly married persons can
birth nothing with blood, and the registration of the issue (child) of that marriage can only be as
high in genus as its registered parent. And so, we must comprehend here that all legal marriages
between public persons as citizens of the United States are without blood consideration and thus
held in contractual attainder, and thus the man and woman in actuality are in an illegitimate wed-
lock. Only their persons are married, not their actual (spiritual) Selves. They stand in surety to the
marriage as a corporation of two admixed natural persons, becoming one artiÞcial person (name)
in law, with the father always presumed and placed as head of that familial corporation. This
subject will be detailed later in this work.

For now, let us return to what the legal marriage and citizenship really is, a bar-gain, a proÞtable
adventure for the society of devils we call the law society and the government that controls and
proÞts from it.

—=—

BAR - noun - [If these words are the Eng. bar, the sense is a shoot, that which shoots, passes or
IS DRIVEN.] 1. A piece of wood, iron or other solid matte, long in proportion to its diameter,
used for various purposes, but especially for a hindrance or obstruction; as the bars of a
fence or gate; the bar of a door or hatchway. Exodus 26:28, Exodus 36:33. 2. ANY obstacle
which obstructs, hinders or defends; an obstruction; a fortiÞcation. Amos 1:5. Must I new
bars to my own joy create. 3. The shore of the SEA, which restrains its WATERS. Job 38:10. 4.
THE RAILING THAT INCLOSES THE PLACE WHICH COUNSEL OCCUPY IN COURTS
OF JUSTICE. Hence the phrase, at the bar of the court, signiÞes in open court. Hence also
licensed lawyers are called BARRISTERS; and hence the whole body of lawyers licensed in
a court, are customarily called the bar. A trial at bar in England, is a trial in the courts of
Westminster, opposed to a trial at Nisi Prius, in the circuits. 5. Figuratively, any tribunal; AS
THE BAR OF PUBLIC OPINION. THUS THE FINAL TRIAL OF MEN IS CALLED THE
BAR OF GODÉ 8. A rock in the sea, according to Brown; or any thing by which structure is
held together, according to Johnson; used in Jonah 2:6. 9. Any thing laid across another, as
bars in HERALDRY, stripes in color, and the likeÉ 12. In law, a peremptory exception
sufÞcient to destroy the plaintiff's action. It is divided into a BAR TO COMMON
INTENDMENT, and BAR SPECIAL; BAR TEMPORARY and BAR PERPETUAL. Bar to
common intendment is an ordinary or general bar which disables the declaration of the
plaintiff. A special bar is more than ordinary, as a Þne, release, or justiÞcation. A temporary
bar is that which is good for a time, but may afterwards cease. A perpetual bar overthrows the
action of the plaintiff FOREVERÉ 15. In the African trade, a denomination of price;
payment formerly being made to the Africans in iron bars. - verb transitive - To fasten with a
bar; as, to bar a door, or gate. 2. TO HINDER; to obstruct, or prevent; as, to bar the entrance
of evil. 3. To prevent; to exclude; to hinder; to make impracticable; as, the distance between
us bars our intercourse. In this sense, the phrase is often varied, thus; the distance bars me
from his aid, or bars him from my aid. 4. To prohibit; to restrain or exclude by express or
implied prohibition; as, THE STATUTE BARS MY RIGHT; THE LAW BARS THE USE of
poisoned weapons. 5. To obstruct, prevent or hinder by any MORAL obstacle; as, the RIGHT
is barred by time, or by statute; a release bars the plaintiff's recovery. 6. To except; to exclude
by exception; as, I bar to night. 7. To cross with stripes of a different colorÉ 9. TO ADORN
WITH TRAPPINGS; a contraction of barb. [See Barb.] (Webs1828)

!605
 BAR SINISTER - A term popularly though erroneously used for baton, A MARK OF
ILLEGITIMACY. (Black4)

BATOON or BATON - noun - A staff or club; a marshal's staff; a truncheon; A BADGE OF

MILITARY HONORS. (Webs1828)

—=—

This open-air prison of jurisdiction has invisible bars, as the bars of US citizenship are those words
and ßattering titles of the agents (attorneys) that create, debate, administer, and contract the laws of
the United States and of the law merchant. And of course, those who reign over hell may only be
called as devils.

—=—

“He is guilty of barratry who for money sells justice.”

—BARATRIAM COMMITTIT QUI PROPTER PECUNIAM JUSTITIAM BARACTAT. Bell. (Black4)

—=—

This historically despised class of devil, the barrister or attorney, is the enemy of a True follower of
christ, always seeking to profess the law of man over the foundational Law of God. They must, for
it is literally their prescribed job and duty at bar to advise and advocate for what is adversarial
(satanic) to GodÕs Law, namely the legal Þction and its law matrix. For the measure (weight) of a
manÕs soul is merely a Þctional commodity to these devilmasters, whose livelihood in mammon
depends solely upon causing men to be clients to their owned and copyrighted ad-vice. To the law
society and its international Bar Associations (artiÞcial persons), the corruption of man as the cause
of his fall into legal Þction is as gold upon the scale of their own system of legal justice. They can
never be trusted, for they only deal in lies (legal Þction), and theyÕre only ever ofÞcers of the court
at their root; hirelings (prostitutes) that work only for the state that grants them license to practice
on behalf of its legal persons and estates. Nothing they deal in is of the realm of the Real, for their
whole profession is based purely on the big lego lie, the artful simulation and representation of
illiterate men organized institutionally through its own brand of syndicalism.

BARRA, or BARRE - In old practice. A plea in bar. The bar of the court. A barrister. (Black4)

BARRA - noun - In Portugal and Spain, a long MEASURE for cloths… (Webs1828)

BARRE - noun - Weights used in the East Indies. The great (and little) bahar, for weighing (of
commodities)… (Webs1828)

BARRATOR - One who commits barratry. See Barretor. (Black4)

BARRETOR - In criminal law. A common mover, exciter, or maintainer of suits and quarrels
either IN COURTS or elsewhere in the country; a disturber of the peace WHO SPREADS
FALSE RUMORS AND CALUMNIES, whereby discord and disquiet may grow among
neighbors. (Black4)

BARRATROUS - FRAUDULENT; having the CHARACTER of barratry. (Black4)

BARRETRY - In criminal law. The act or offense of a barretor, usually called "common
barretry." See Barratry. (Black4)

BARRATRY - In criminal law. Also spelled "Barretry." The offense of frequently exciting and
stirring up quarrels and suits, either at law or otherwise. Common barratry is the practice of

!606
EXCITING GROUNDLESS JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS. In maritime law. An act committed
by the master or mariners of a VESSEL, for some unlawful or fraudulent purpose,
CONTRARY TO THEIR DUTY TO THE OWNERS, whereby the latter sustain injury. It
may include negligence, if so gross as to evidence fraud. Some fraudulent ACT OF THE
MASTER or mariners, TENDING TO THEIR OWN BENEFIT, TO THE PREJUDICE OF
THE OWNER OF THE VESSEL, without his PRIVITY or CONSENT. A generic term, which
includes many acts of various kinds and degrees. It comprehends any unlawful, fraudulent,
or dishonest act of the master or mariners, and every violation of duty by them arising from
gross and culpable negligence contrary to their duty to the owner of the vessel, and which
might work loss or injury to him IN THE COURSE OF THE VOYAGE INSURED. A mutiny
of the crew, and forcible dispossession by them of the master and other ofÞcers from the ship,
is a form of barratry. In Scotch law. THE CRIME COMMITTED BY A JUDGE WHO
RECEIVES A BRIBE FOR HIS JUDGMENT. See Champerty. (Black4)

CHAMPERTY - noun - A species of MAINTENANCE, being a BARGAIN with a plaintiff or

defendant, to divide the land or other matter in suit, between them, if they prevail;
whereupon THE CHAMPERTOR IS TO CARRY ON THE PARTYS SUIT AT HIS OWN
EXPENSE. The PURCHASE of a suit, or of the right of suing. (Webs1828)

CHAMPERTOR - noun - [See Champerty.] In law, one who is guilty of champerty, which see.
(Webs1828)

CHAMPER - noun - One that champs or bits. (Webs1828)

BIT - …verb transitive - To put a bridle upon a horse; to put the bit in the mouth. - preterit tense
and participle passive - of bite. SEIZED or wounded by the teeth. (Webs1828)

TEETH - Plural of tooth, which see. In the teeth directly; IN DIRECT OPPOSITION; IN
FRONT. (Webs1828)

BARRENNESS - Sterility; THE INCAPACITY TO BEAR CHILDREN. (Black4)

BARRED - participle passive - Fastened with a bar; HINDERED; RESTRAINED; EXCLUDED;

forbid; striped; CHECKERED. (Webs1828)

EXCHEQUER - That department of the English government which has charge of the
collection of the national revenue; THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT. It is said to have been
so named from THE CHEQUERED CLOTH, RESEMBLING A CHESS-BOARD, which
anciently covered the table there, and on which, when certain of the king's accounts were
made up, the sums were marked and scored with counters. For "Court of Exchequer" and
"Court of Exchequer Chamber," see those titles. (Black4)

CHEQUE - A variant of check. (Black4)

CHECKER - The old Scotch form of exchequer. (Black4)

CHECKER - verb transitive -1. To variegate with cross lines; to form into little squares, like a
chess board, by lines or stripes of different colors. Hence, 2. To diversify; to variegate with
different qualities, scenes, or events. Our MINDS are, as it were, CHECKERED WITH
TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD. - noun - 1. ONE WHO CHECKS OR RESTRAINS; A
REBUKER. 2. A CHESS-BOARD. (Webs1828)

CHECKERBOARD SYSTEM - This term, with reference to entries on lands, means one entry
built on another, and a third on the second. (Black4)

HELL - The name formerly given to A PLACE UNDER THE EXCHEQUER chamber,
WHERE THE KING'S DEBTORS WERE CONFINED. (Black4)

!607
 BARRED - OBSTRUCTED BY A BAR; SUBJECT TO HINDRANCE OR OBSTRUCTION
BY A BAR OR BARRIER which, if interposed, WILL PREVENT LEGAL REDRESS OR
RECOVERY; as, when it is said that a claim or cause of action is "barred by the statute of
limitations.” (Black4)

GAIN - verb transitive - [Hebrew, to gain to possess.] 1. TO OBTAIN BY INDUSTRY OR THE

EMPLOYMENT OF CAPITAL; TO GET AS PROFIT OR ADVANTAGE; to acquire. Any
industrious person may gain a good living in America; but it is less difÞcult to gain property,
than it is to use it with prudence. Money at interest may gain Þve, six, or seven per cent.
WHAT IS A MAN PROFITED, IF HE SHALL GAIN THE WHOLE WORLD, AND LOSE
HIS OWN SOUL? Matthew 16:26. 2. To win; to obtain by superiority or success; as, to gain a
battle or a victory; TO GAIN A PRIZE; to gain a cause in law. 3. To obtain; to acquire; to
procure; TO RECEIVE; as, to gain favor; TO GAIN REPUTATION. For fame with toil we
gain but lose with ease. 4. To obtain an increase of anything; as, to gain time. 5. To obtain or
receive anything, GOOD OR BAD; AS, TO GAIN HARM AND LOSS. Acts 27:21. 6. To
draw into any interest or party; to win to one's side; to conciliate. To gratify the queen, and
gain the court. If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. Matthew 18:15. 7. To obtain
as a suitor. 8. To reach; to attain to; to arrive at; as, to gain the top of a mountain; to gain a good
harbor. To gain into, TO DRAW OR PERSUADE TO JOIN IN. He gained Lepidus into his
measures. To gain over, to draw to another party or interest; to win over. To gain ground, TO
ADVANCE IN ANY UNDERTAKING; to prevail; to acquire strength or extent; to increase. -
verb intransitive - To have advantage or proÞt; TO GROW RICH; to advance in interest or
happiness. THOU HAST GREEDILY GAINED OF THY NEIGHBORS BY EXTORTION.
Ezekiel 22:13. 1. To encroach; to advance on; to come forward by degrees; with on; as, the
ocean or river gains on the land. 2. To advance nearer; to gain ground on; with on; as, a ßeet
horse gains on his competitor. 3. To get ground; to prevail against or have the advantage. The
English have not only gained upon the Venetians in the Levant, but have their cloth in Venice
itself. 4. To obtain inßuence with. My good behavior had so far gained on the emperor, that I
began to conceive hopes of liberty. To gain the wind, in sea language, is to arrive on the
windward side of another ship. - noun - ProÞt; interest; something obtained as an advantage.
BUT WHAT THINGS WERE GAIN TO ME, THOSE I COUNTED LOSS FOR CHRIST.
Philippians 3:7. 1. UNLAWFUL ADVANTAGE. 2 Corinthians 12:17. 2. Overplus in
computation; any thing opposed to loss… (Webs1828)

—=—

Is the jurisdiction of the United States, as a constituted debtor nation, an open-air hell? One may
deny this if one does not understand the complexity of that word. The prison for debtors is again
no longer a dungeon under the antiquated treasury department (exchequer) of the king, it is the
very person (status) we are clothed in artiÞcially, subjects under the invisible, jurisdictional chains
of franchise (freedom) in the nativity of citizenship.

Oh, how I wish this were merely a play on words, this hell we are bound to:

PRISON BOUNDS - THE LIMITS OF THE TERRITORY SURROUNDING A PRISON,

WITHIN WHICH AN IMPRISONED DEBTOR, WHO IS OUT ON BONDS, MAY GO AT
WILL. See Gaol. (Black4)

GAOL LIBERTIES, GAOL LIMITS - A DISTRICT around a gaol, DEFINED BY LIMITS,

WITHIN WHICH PRISONERS ARE ALLOWED TO GO AT LARGE ON GIVING
SECURITY TO RETURN. It is considered a part of the gaol. (Black4)

GAOL - A prison for temporary conÞnement; a jail; a place for the conÞnement of offenders
against the law. As distinguished from "prison," it is said to be a place for temporary or
provisional conÞnement, or for the punishment of the lighter offenses and misdemeanors.
See, also, Jail. (Black4)

!608
 GAOLER - A variant of “JAILER." (Black4)

GAOL DELIVERY - In criminal law, THE DELIVERY OR CLEARING of a gaol of the

prisoners conÞned therein, by trying them. In popular speech, the clearing of a gaol by the
escape of the prisoners. (Black4)



GENERAL GAOL DELIVERY - In English law, at the assizes the judges sit by virtue of Þve
several authorities, one of which is the commission of "general gaol delivery." This empowers
them TO TRY AND MAKE DELIVERANCE OF EVERY PRISONER who shall be in the
gaol when the judges arrive at the circuit town, whether an indictment has been preferred at
any previous assize or not. This is also a part of the title of some American criminal courts, as,
in Pennsylvania, the "court of oyer and terminer and general jail delivery." (Black4)

TERMINER - noun - A DETERMINING; as in oyer and terminer. (Webs1828)

DETERMINING - participle present tense - Ending; deciding; FIXING; SETTLING; resolving;

LIMITING; DIRECTING. (Webs1828)

OYER - noun - 1. In law, a hearing or trial of causes. A court of oyer and terminer is
constituted by a commission to inquire, hear and determine all treasons, FELONIES and
misdemeanors. 2. The hearing, as of a writ, bond, note or other specialty; as when a defendant
in court PRAYS oyer of a writing. (Webs1828)

—=—

The district of the nation is the gaol of the nation. It is where debtor’s are held (in purgatorial hell)
temporarily, which can also mean for the artiÞcial life of the resident status in public persona
(demon) we so inhabit. The bond of suretyship is the bond of the gaoler, ensuring that we (men in
agency) will return to the principal’s district courts (circuits) when our strawmen are charged with
a summons to Þctionally appear there in persona (legal mask). And this imaginary place (juris-
diction) is where we pray (plea) to the false gods (magistrate judges) of that Þctional realm. Never
forget that the United States jurisdiction is merely the district and jurisdiction of the gaol. This truly
is an open-air prison for debtor’s, and this is the very purpose of the creation and law of nations.
There are only private and public, master and servant, controllers and goyim.

And so what is it to bar-gain or to agree to a bar-gain? To gain one thing from the barring of some-
thing else. To suffer loss in order to gain something else. To be barred from one thing (land,
paternity) in order to merely enjoy the other thing (tenancy, maternity). To lose the Real and accept
the artiÞcial in payment. To corrupt the unalienable blood-rights under God in exchange for mere
legal rights. To sell your baby’s characteristics and likeness into the bondage of public citizen-ship
is to allow the state to assume all rights over it, and in return the Natural parent is only to be placed
into the receivership of the franchise and expenses of raising the stateÕs child according to its
amoral and immoral law in limited and sanctioned guardianship and forced public education
(slave school). What we gain at bar (in law) we lose in spirituality (our own Nature). Truth is lost to
gain Þction. God is lost when mammon is worshiped and exchanged. And in the end, what we
really gain is a lack of Natural Law duty as Self-responsibility to all aspects of man and God.

How many reading this would give up everything they believe that they “possess” to be a True
man of God in Nature as the story of christ reveals, which is to say a completely Free and private
man of a Pure and Charitable Nature, and to thus take back the rightful and full claim of paternity
of one’s children by correcting that mis-taken legal identity and surname we bargained for through
trickery and with voluntary ignorance by implied contract at birth?

This remains to be seen…

!609
But the scriptural (foundational) Law has certainly laid its own course (righteous path) regarding
this subject when it states that the path is narrow, and that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of
a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. This is because the rich man never
realizes that the kingdom of God is under his own two feet the whole time; buried under his
mansion and under his own Self-deceit, cut off from his spirit by his own conceit. Of course the
church teaches that the kingdom cannot be attained in this Life except through its incorporation
(artiÞcial persona), telling us that the Òlaw of the landÓ (of man) is actually a Godsend. And while
partially true, the church doesn’t reveal the True nature of those gods of the nations that sent it.
And so most fritter this Life away in pursuit of the devilÕs favor and of mammonÕs tools only
because of the hope of a better, Þctional life that might await us in the hereafter. Nothing could be
more ridiculous than to waste this True Life believing another will deliver us to heaven, especially
when that Life is wasted here while ignoring heaven on earth and while disobeying the very Word
(Son) that one would be judged upon thereof for entry. This is idiocy, unreasonable and indeed
unscriptural, based solely on the word-magic of the priest class. It is sadly doubtful that most men,
the majority of whom are so fervently addicted to the hell of money, false title, and social status
stemming from their employments would ever be willing to release themselves from the legal debt-
slavery for which that wealth and gain actually represents. The scriptures are clear in their
teachings that many (the multitude) will not do so, and also that the remainder or ÒremnantÓ must
separate (circumcise) themselves from that mass of mammon worshipers in the cities in order to
walk on the narrow path without such temptations in artiÞce.

ThayerÕs Greek Lexicon describes the notion of what a Òrich manÓ is in terms that make this
passage ever more clear:

Strong's G4145 - Plousios (rich man), from - -λοῦτος (G4149):

ÒG4145É for rich. Properly wealthy, abounding in MATERIAL resources.

SUBSTANTIVELY, WITHOUT THE ART, a rich man. METAPHORICALLY, abounding,
abundantly supplied, of THE THING IN WHICH ONE ABOUNDS. ABSOLUTELY,
ABOUNDING IN CHRISTIAN VIRTUES AND ETERNAL POSSESSIONS. Of Christ,
while he formally abounded in THE RICHES OF A HEAVENLY CONDITION, by
assuming HUMAN NATURE he entered into A STATE OF (EARTHLY) POVERTY.Ó

ÒG4149É a multitude, riches, wealth; Properly and absolutely, abundance of EXTERNAL

POSSESSIONSÉ

—=—

Earthly povertyÉ This is but reference to the gain and conquering (purchasing) of secular things,
be they commodities or false titles. The corporate church is in Reality only secular just as the
governments of the earth. What one owns through government status is not the riches and wealth
of spirituality. Earthly wealth and riches can only serve to take man away from his own spiritual
Nature and connection to Source. Christ needed no stuff. And the only way to claim stuff as one's
own is through conÞrmation of a legal persona and embracement of the legal law that would
protect and insure it, and that acceptance necessarily means debt to a master. Without one, man has
no insurances or assurances, only Natural Law duty. To the greedy man this sounds horriÞc, for his
greed and his stuff necessarily must equate to others having less stuff than he, some hungry, some
starving, and some dying of such a lack of food stuffs. This is the only Reality of legally protected
wealth, for it is legally kept from all others who actually need it. It can be no other way, for wealth
on one side must have its equal and opposite reaction on the other. Wealth cannot exist in a Truly
Equitable state of Being under the Pure Love and Charity principles of True christian piety, for
poverty therefore could also not exist under God’s Law. Wealth and poverty only exist when artiÞce
(evil) is respected over Nature. Poverty Exists because of the false-existence and respect of money
and its valuation over all things in mammon, because of its power over men’s conscious actions
without consideration of the foundational Law of Love and Charity, not because of its pretended
artiÞcial scarcity and absence.

!610
As we will discuss later, this word external means the property of another, as something foreign,
which is that for which we covet against our Nature. What is external is only that which we may
use, but never know or hold. That which is external is opposed to that which is private or esoteric
(secret), which is that which is not exoteric and public (external). The false, illusionary riches of the
artiÞcial (legal) wealth of persons is always an external show containing no True wealth of the
Spirit of Source.

So what Really makes us happy?

HAP - An old word which signiÞes TO CATCH; as, “to hap the rent,” “to hap the deed
poll.” (Bouv1856)

HAP - noun - [Latin capio.] 1. That which comes suddenly or unexpectedly; CHANCE;
FORTUNE; accident; casual EVENT. [See Chance and Casual.] Whether ART it was or
heedless hap, CURS'D BY GOOD HAPS, AND CURS'D BE THEY THAT BUILD THEIR
HOPES ON HAPS. 2. MISFORTUNE. [But this word is obsolete or obsolescent, except in
compounds and derivatives.] - verb intransitive - To happen; to befall; to come BY CHANCE.
(Webs1828)

HAPPINESS - The foundation of ethics or natural law is “that every man should pursue his
own true and SUBSTANTIAL happiness.” BUT AS UTILITY CONTRADICTS THE
COMMON SENSE AND FEELING OF MANKIND, UTILITY IS NOT THE STANDARD
OF RIGHT AND WRONG. The object of all government is to promote the happiness and
prosperity of the community by which it is established. Happiness is an inalienable (sellable)
right. In its pursuit all avocations, honors, positions, are alike open to every one. The right of
men to pursue their happiness means the right to pursue ANY LAWFUL BUSINESS OR
VOCATION, in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, which may
increase their prosperity or develop their faculties, so as to give them their highest
enjoyment. The right to follow any of the common occupations of life is an inalienable right;
it was formulated as such under the phrase "pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration of
Independence. This right is a large ingredient in the CIVIL LIBERTY of the citizen. No
legislature may deny the right to all but A FEW FAVORED INDIVIDUALS, BY
INVESTING THE LATTER WITH A MONOPOLY. See Privilege. (WCA1889)

—=—

Legal happiness… the cosmic joke of the ages.

Can happiness be a bad thing? If the devil offered one “happiness” through his contract, does one
not pause to consider what the cost of that speciÞcally deÞned contractual ÒhappinessÓ would be
before signing up for it? Sadly, most would not. Would it ever occur to man that his happiness in
the legal realm is a curse, meaning that happiness under mammon (debt) is despair under God and
Nature? Can we ever come to realize that happiness in its legal form is pleasure without substance,
a curse upon man? Can we Truly Þnd happiness knowing the poverty and suffering of so many
others? Can we imagine that the acquired event of this legal term of art happiness in chance of
fortune is actually a spiritual misfortune for man under God? In looking around at such a
misfortunate society steeped in the secured happiness of its own greed, poverty, and spiritual death
under voluntary enslavement to mammon, one has to wonder if man may ever again know
happiness as intended under the Natural Law. In the legal realm, happiness is an alienable
privilege, not an unalienable right. And so perhaps happiness is the ultimate legal dis-ease.

Ultimate legal happiness is the legal possession of a monopoly. And the right of happiness can be
denied to all public, common citizenships, but not to those who dwell and act in privacy and in
sovereignty over the public. This is of course adversarial (satanic) to True spiritual happiness.

!611
It could be said that man need only defend his own castle if other men have less than he or nothing
at all. Only in the legal realm would man seek to acquire “property” as the “happiness” of riches
and wealth despite the Natural needs of all other men. A man with a home should never live in the
secured privilege of legal happiness and thus be somehow spiritually content while any one of his
fellow man is homeless. Legal happiness is not spirituality. Legal happiness is not Love. Happiness
is a commercial, constituted legal term used as a speciÞcally capitalized proper noun (in
capitonym) with a speciÞc legal (anti-God) meaning in the constitution of the United States.

What a strange concept, that we should avoid “happiness” at all costs when it is presented without
its foundation in the Law of Nature. For it is only our personÕs (legal statusÕs) Þctional happiness
that is considered by government, not the actual and physical happiness of our minds, bodies, and
souls. The demon is only happy in hell.

The happiness of ÞctionÉ Just what does it mean to legally be in Òpursuit of happinessÓ as it is
used in the legalistic constitution?

PURSUER - Canon law. The name by which the complainant or plaintiff IS KNOWN IN
THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS. (Bouv1856)

PURSE - See BET; PRIZE. (WCA1889)

PURSUE - 1. To follow, in order TO OVER TAKE OR OBTAIN. Following immediately with

INTENT TO RECLAIM OR RECAPTURE GOODS being carried off by a thief, or an
escaping animal, is making "fresh pursuit.” 2. To use measures to obtain; TO PROSECUTE to
continue: as, TO PURSUE A REMEDY. Compare Suit. See Happiness. (WCA1889)

—=—

Here again we must rethink our own fallacious thoughts. We must realize that when the govern-
ment states that its citizens have a right to pursue LEGALIZED ÒhappinessÓ (a corporate
franchise), it is only saying that we have the legal, equal right and capacity to sue and be sued,
which requires us to in-jure others. In commercialism, happiness is only monetary gain, for this is
all that mammon has to offer. Of course government reserves that right so that its citizens canÕt sue
it. False gods are immune from their own laws and from pursuit by their own creations.

In other words, the verb of Living in Natural happiness is legally replaced by the noun, the name of
ÒhappinessÓ as a legal Þction. Happiness is a contractual obligation, not a state of mind or respect
of Nature. How we say each word completely changes its meaning. An action, a description, a
name, a titleÉ these all sound the same but are often opposed to each other. The name of some-
thing does not necessarily mean that the thing so named is representative of the substance of the
thing, and is more often only the husked out (dead) form of the thing Ñ like a genetically altered
virus that is scooped and re-Þlled with something quite different from the intent of its original
purpose or meaning of Existence. ÒHappiness,Ó and for that matter every other capitalized word in
the constitution, are just such proper nouns, which steal the substance, action, and description of
Reality and replace it with legal form, personiÞcation, and trickery.

I suppose the cartoon character Wile E. Coyote exists in the form of Þctional ÒhappinessÓ because he
has a vocation, a job, and his ÒhappinessÓ manifests each time he gets blown up, falls off a cliff, is
smashed, or gets clobbered by a boulder. In the cartoon world of legal Þction, happiness is only the
franchise (free choice) of legalized business and occupation title, after all. Mr. Coyote really has no
right to complain to his cartoon masters about his aliened privilege, and neither do we. The dead
can’t complain about what life throws at them. And the more spiritually dead and corrupted we
are, the more we may succeed in that foolish pursuit of legal happiness. The suit and tie is certainly
representative of such utter corruption, the partaking in a uniform clothing of artiÞcial happiness,
like priests in their ceremonial robes.

!612
Seriously though, what the hell is a tie for? Ever notice how ridiculous it looks, or is it so
normalized into our cultural and customary norm that we can’t see the ridiculousness of it all?
Ever notice the arrogance of those who wear one in their pursuit of the happiness of mammon and
Þction? Ever measured the proudness of your self while you adorn your person in such Þctional
and non-functional, purely ßattering trappings of commerce for show? And yet none of us seem to
have any clue as to why we are even wearing it! This is normalization; a uniformity of public-
minded insanity, doing the same thing day after day and expecting different results. With
conformity comes promotions to higher ßattery in Þctional title. With such promotion of course
comes more money. And with more money comes fancier uniforms and not only more debt
capacity, but better debtor status. Slaves in ties. Symbolic neck chains by Ralph Lauren. Oh, the hu-
manity! Oh, the idiocracy!

Where else but in legal Þction and in mammon could a society live by the rules of such a strange
commerce as fashion, believing (loving) wholeheartedly that the clothes make the man? What is more
symbolic of consumer slavery than that? What could possibly be more opposed and adversarial to
God’s Word (Son) and to True, Natural happiness? Christ was anointed by Jehovah with spiritual
gladness, not legal happiness.

But since we are all legally living under the forced pursuit of the equality of legal happiness, also
called as debt, the question becomes how might one void that which is apparently in the view of
law unavoidable? How do we render such a dis-ease of falsely contracted, commercial “happiness”
in mammon back to Caesar so as to pursue the Reality of spiritual Happiness found only in and
under God? We simply stop acting as something we are not! We stop being artiÞcially uniform in
the agency of such organized chaos. We stop participating in that custom and culture which
offends our God because it offends the very Nature of our Selves. We stop working for masters, for
their artful wages (evidences of debt), and stop creating their patented Þctions and technologies
designed to further enslave us. We render back to Caesar what is Caesar’s and render ourselves
unto the Permanence of that Supremacy of Jehovah. We abandon our legal identity and all beneÞts
and subsequent obligations that come with that artiÞcial state of legal existence, and respect no
longer any and all persons. We ditch mammon and return to our own priceless Nature. We act only
in the non-legalized First person, respecting only the First, christian name. We stop being
demonized, no longer answering as chattel when called or summoned by that legal pet surname.
But most importantly, we do the opposite action of this legal act of consent by our conÞrmation and
ratiÞcationÉ

—=—

“A bad or invalid custom is [ought] to be abolished.”



MALUS USUS ABOLENDUS EST. Litt. B 212; Co. Litt. 141; 1 B1. Comm. 76; Broom, Max. 921. (Black4)

—=—

The principle of equal but opposite reactionsÉ could it be that simple?

ABOLISH - verb transitive - [Latin abolco; from ab and oleo, olesco, to grow.] 1. TO MAKE
VOID; TO ANNUL; to abrogate; applied chießy and appropriately to ESTABLISHED
LAWS, CONTRACTS, RITES, CUSTOMS and INSTITUTIONS — as to abolish laws by a
repeal, actual or virtual. 2. To destroy, or put an end to; AS TO ABOLISH IDOLS. Isaiah 2:18.
TO ABOLISH DEATH. 2 Timothy 1:10. This sense is not common. TO ABOLISH
POSTERITY, in the translation of Pausanias, Lib. 3. Ca 6, is hardly allowable. (Webs1828)

—=—

When the Bible speaks to abolishing death, no right-minded man can possibly believe this is
anything but a metaphoric, parabolic concept. To have spiritual Life we must abolish civil life
(spiritual death).

!613
The lie of legal existence inßuences everything. It is this sheer belief (love) and faith (conÞdence) in
the lie that conÞrms its false existence, and it lays (lies) in the subsistence of fraud until rebutted by
the Reality of Nature through the will of man under GodÕs Law. The object (purpose and intent) of
the lie is manÕs subjection and allegiance to the trap laid (the name of the lie). The lie only seeks to
perpetuate itself as a vicarious antithesis to the Reality of GodÕs Nature, just as one would expect
from an adversarial (satanic) force. The legal creators of the lie can rule in no other way, as the
magistrate gods over their own creation, than by making the lie seem as Real as possible to those
who voluntarily suffer it. The lie as a foundation must be respected and its constitution prostituted
to, or the legal matrix (simulation) as a corruptive power and authority over GodÕs Law (Reality)
will fall. Everything we know as government, as our persona, as our name, as our property, and as
our so-called legal freedoms, liberties, and rights are all part of the big lie. These things simply do
not Exist in Nature and cannot in actuality Exist anywhere in Nature. They must be conÞrmed to be
in artiÞcial existence by men who therefore must acknowledge and support the lie in order to claim
these things as their false reality. They represent a legal existence only. They are creations only of
man and act only according to their artiÞcial creatorÕs will. And most importantly, an established
right for one person, just as with wealth, necessarily means that others do not possess such a right,
for otherwise its existence would be pointless and redundant. This is the nature of the constitution, a
restatement of certain rights reserved by the few while permissively being deprived from all others
under them.

But none of it is Real unless you can be made to believe…

—=—

“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, 


DOESN'T GO AWAY.”


—Philip K. Dick, quoted from: ‘I Hope I Shall Arrive Soon’

—=—

The legal matrix-code exists only on paper and in the mind, and needs no computer interface to
control manÕs actions. It relies on manÕs ignorance of and/or acceptance of it as a lie, combined
with manÕs belief in (love of) that lieÕs formal existence as truth.

Technology came about long before computers did, for technology is merely art, and is only ever
expressed by the language code that controls itÉ

TECHNOLOGY - noun - [Gr. ART, and word or discourse.] 1. A description of ARTS; or a

treatise on the ARTS. 2. An explanation of the TERMS OF THE ARTS. (Webs1828)

—=—

An object, and therefore anything of a legal objective, does not mean or point to anything in Reality,
but only to the past perception and description of the Real thing or idea as a re-presentation of it Ñ
as a physical or objective fact. But a legal fact is and can only be presented in words (terms of art).
Thus all facts are merely conÞrmed lies which have no actual bearing on Reality, existing only in
and as a representational lie. The lie becomes a conÞrmed legal (artiÞcial) truth. Words (facts) in
law must be agreed and consented to, and they must be conÞrmed and thus attached to some part
of Reality in name only and by force of will. The fact has no requirement (force of mind) to be in
harmony with Reality, and instead only need be believed to be a true representation of Reality. This
is how government and its agents and agencies exist outside of Reality and its Law(s) while at the
same time effecting It. This is how lies, fraud, and deceit are legally made into truth, fact, and
evidence. And this is how man may call himself by any other word than that of a Creature of God,
through names and ßattering titles that are always a lieÉ

!614
We live (illiterately) in and by a lie; a Þctional matrix of legal words that strictly simulates Reality.
And all aspects of this big lie are laid out in a design that creates a simulacra of this world Ñ a copy
with no original. The simulation is in fact so complete that most are not able to differentiate it from
the Reality it re-presents. The Þction of words as names (nouns) has been laid upon all of Nature,
like the impenetrable shell over a tender nut, so that man cannot even recognize himself as any-
thing but his backwards mirror image in false legal persona and name. Nature has been covered up
by this transparent lie; by legal designs laid by evil men (artiÞcers). Nature waits to be uncovered;
un-occulted; to be seen and respected again. Disclosure and rediscovery of what is TruthÑ a
spiritual rebirth. Revelation…

If I claim to live in California, then my claim can only refer to my Þctional persona as a legal
(Þctional) resident of that Þctional state. If my home is in California, then I can only be referring to a
piece of paper as a title and a Þctionally framed area upon a map, for California does not Exist in
Nature. If I claim to be American, then I can only be referring to the artiÞciality of my Þctional
persona in its birth and legal form called legally as ethnicity. I am conÞrming my legal bond by
nativity. For I can only actually and in Nature Live, have a home in, and be man in and of Jehovah.
California is not part of Nature. It is not of God. Its borders are not Reality, for no borders or even
straight lines Exist in Nature. Yet its jurisdictional legal laws prevent me from being one with my
God by requiring me to have a split personality, with one foot always in that commercial Þction of
mammon.

When this false legal existence (the lie of personiÞcation) is compared to GodÕs Permanent Being in
the Reality of Existence (as Jehovah; as Creation Itself), we see the True Nature of Reality as
distinguished from the artiÞciality of the entire structure of government and religion, which is
based completely on words as Òterms of artÓ (words creating artiÞce through technology). The legal
re-presentation of mammon stands as the spoken, written, and respected lie in and as this artiÞcial
existence. Its sole purpose is to act against Jehovah with impunity and without respect of GodÕs
priceless and eternal Laws of Nature. ArtiÞce simply does not and cannot respect Reality, for it
cannot Exist in Reality. It is only ever a lie.

In this sense, when a man appears in court or in any jurisdiction where his use of Þction in
commerce is assumed to be through a legalized Þctional person (which is 100% of the time a
presumption in the United States jurisdiction), that Þctional persona is only then considered to be
physically present in that jurisdiction. Remember, the word physical has a legal meaning, not just a
Real or Natural one. To be physical in the legal realm means to exist (to lie) at that time in that false
persona, so that the actions of the man (physical facts) are considered to be done in person Ñ done
publicly not privately. However, the person can also legally be considered to be in appearance
without the man in surety physically being present in court, whereas the appearance would be
subjective and purely Þctitious. This is not uncommon. AttorneyÕs (agents) may also appear
physically on behalf of the surety without that man being physically in court.

It occurs to me that this would all be so much easier to explain if personhood was in fact merely a
baseball cap. When we wear it, we therefore would be in person. And our presence would be
understood without doubt to be in that false persona. But because there is no tangible or visible
artifact that reveals what personhood is to the senses or when it is being invoked, this work will
necessarily be about 1,000 pages longer than if that were the case!

PRESENT - adjective - NOW EXISTING; at hand; relating to the present time; considered with
reference to the present time. (Black4)

PRESENT - noun - A gift; a gratuity; anything presented or given. (Black4)

PRESENTER - One that presents. (Black4)

PRESENTLY - Immediately; NOW; at once. A right which may be exercised "presently" IS

OPPOSED TO ONE IN REVERSION OR REMAINDER. (Black4)

!615
 PHYSICAL - Relating or pertaining to the BODY, as distinguished from the mind or soul or
the emotions; material, substantive, HAVING AN OBJECTIVE EXISTENCE, AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM IMAGINARY OR FICTITIOUS; REAL, having relation to facts,
AS DISTINGUISHED FROM MORAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE. (Black4)

—=—

It must be comprehended that the gift of Life is a present from God, the gift of presence, of our very
eternal Existence here and now. And so our Source, “christian” name is called the gift, the given
name, for it Exists above all other attached Þctional names, surnames, nicknames, titles, numbers
and marks. It is immovable (attached to the Earth/Creation). It is the original, the First, whereas all
other names are aboriginal, where the Latin preÞx Òab-” means to separate, to depart from, or to
move away from. To the legal gods, the term aboriginal is used upon those peoples not of their
origin, but of the legal system and its trickery. They were the Þrst, the inherent inhabitancy, the
blood of the actual land. Thus aboriginal is a name of reproach and contempt to those who will not
be governed by another and must be subjected therefore by military conquest (purchase). Purchase
(to conquer) is merely another word for gain, meaning to acquire by any means but by descent or
hereditary right (Webs1828).

But wait a minute, we must further deÞne just what a body is here. Remember, this is legal-speak,
originating from the devil-masters (lawyers and scribes), and not merely that vulgar common
language. This word, as most others, must be considered dualistically and Þguratively as well. For
in legalism, the person’s body is made of nothing at all, appearing only as an anthropomorphized
recreation of law made only of words on paper.

BODY - A PERSON. Used of a natural body, OR OF AN ARTIFICIAL ONE CREATED BY

LAW, AS A CORPORATION. The main part of the human body; the trunk. The term may,
however, embrace ALL MEMBERS OF THE PERSON, including the HEAD. Also the main
part of an INSTRUMENT; in deeds it is spoken of as distinguished from the recitals and other
introductory parts and signatures; in afÞdavits, from the title and jurat. A collection of laws;
that is, the embodiment of the laws in one connected statement or collection, called a
"BODY OF LAWSÓ). (examples) A cement mixer assembled on a truck, The Workmen's
BeneÞt Fund of the United States of America. (Black4)

—=—

So a body can be a Real (of Nature) or Þctional (natural) person, a corporation, all individual
(natural person) members of the corporation as one artiÞcial body politic incorporated, part of or
the whole man or hu-man, a private association, a whole set of laws, a fund in mammon, or a
machine upon a vehicle. But nowhere is GodÕs Creation actually invoked when this word is used in
legalisms. Man is simply not a legal body. Only the hu-man body is referenced, which means the
body of man considered without the mind and soul as a legal “physical” but artful fact. Man can
only be seen and considered by legal entities through the looking glass of Þction. Only the status
(person) can be seen. Nature and its God must be vanquished. Non-sense must conquer.

Ultimately I have come to the strange conclusion that written language, be it numerical code, sigils,
symbols, glyphs, letters, or any other form without substance, is evil when respected above its
description. It is anti-Real, where the word anti again merely means replacement or in the stead of the
Reality (Nature) with which the word re-presents. In this sense then, the word evil is being used
here to express opposite, in place of. Anti-Life and anti-Nature (Source)É For words are not Alive
and have no origin or place in Nature. Words in all languages, even etymologically speaking, are a
form of simulacra, copies without original, without foundation. Any and every word can be
changed tomorrow, and like so many before it, every modern language may become dead. Reality
Exists despite the words used to name and describe Reality. But the legal law is based solely on
words that are artiÞcially and by force attached to the substance of all Being.

!616
How many trees in the ÒforestÓ have never been called by their individual names? How many Þsh
in the sea swim in the depths of the namelessly undiscovered? How many plants in the Amazon
have never been seen or named? Yet their Existence thrives without the artiÞce of language, and
their welfare is all the better for having not been found, legalized, or ÒprotectedÓ by manÕs empty,
Þctional words, which destroy their True freedom and protection under GodÕs Nature and Law. For
all things must Þrst be legally named (Þctionalized) to be protected, and they must Þrst be
protected before they can be declared as unprotected, and Þnally they must be declared as
unprotected before they can be raped and destroyed. This is the legal way of licensure (anarchy); as
legalized rape.

The substance of anything can only be considered upon its construction, and our simulated reality
is based only upon the Þctional form of these symbols of language. It is the art form which each
symbol-set creates as a language art that re-presents Reality as Þction. Word DNA. To Live in
Reality is to live without names and titles. This is not to suggest that words should be abandoned,
only that art should be abolished in lieu of conscious awareness of the Reality those words mimic
and describe in artiÞce and authority. A Òdoctor,Ó for instance, should not be allowed to be
irresponsible for his actions in agency and malpractice merely because he is insured for the actions
of his Þctional person under his corporate surname and artful title. ArtiÞcial things (names and
titles), in other words, should not be given a value over that of the Real thing they describe in
Nature, and should certainly not be used as an excuse for oneÕs actions. Nature should be treasured
but not considered as a treasurable commodity by its name. It should be treated as it is in self-
Existent Being, not as disposable property. Nonsense should not be paramount over sense.

The word paramount is of course another word for sovereign. God vs. the godsÉ The word ÒGodÓ as
a noun (name) should not be placed in supremacy over the Reality that is the verb of God
(Jehovah), the Permanence of Being as Supreme; as Life and Love Itself. God is priceless,
namelessÉ but control of the name and title of ÒGodÓ in church and state is certainly a valuable,
albeit artiÞcial commodity. In totality, words should never have value, power, or authority. They
may be descriptive, but that description should never possess authority over the Real to alter or
change Its Natural Right to Exist and thrive. For that which is self-evident, including Nature and Its
Law and Life Itself, needs not words to deÞne it. The Source of Law must be paramount over the
words written as if they were of Source. The substance of God must be Supreme over the mere
name of ÒGod.Ó The lie (representation/simulation) should never have more power than Reality.

This notion of a legal physical existence, as a reference to the ÒwillÓ and to a Òfact,Ó requires even
more imagination, or at least the turning off of Natural reason. For the lie that is a legal existence is
not of God and Nature. It is not an Existence in Reality. The actual physical occurrence of a fact
never actually happens in court, any more than Bugs Bunny is ever actually clobbered over its
Þctional head by an ÒAcmeÓ cartoon hammer.

To be spiritually Living is to therefore be unrecognizable, undeÞnable, indescribable, innumerable,

illegal, and totally ambiguous (without mark, name, and number) to any Þctional government. To
be of GodÕs Living Kingdom is to be name-less, mark-less, and number-less. A Purely spiritual
(religious) man claims no personhood and no property belonging to another, and thus claims no
civil rights, security, or protection (insurance) from the anti-spiritual government of mammon.
Civil death does not require Natural death, only spiritual awakening in both belief (faith) and
action (works). In the legal parlance, all of these words are purely descriptive of form, and do not
refer to the Reality of spirituality in any way, for a natural person is of course in legal fact merely a
civil (political) thing, a term of art. Legality does not recognize spirituality any more than God
recognizes legality, for God and mammon are directly opposed to each other and cannot Exist in
the same realm.

Now, if the reader still feels this is too ÒreligiousÓ in its connotations, he or she better quickly
realize that government and the gods (magistrates) that rule over the legal realm is religion, in
name only, and to be a person of government is to be faithful to that religiously ÒestablishedÓ and
ÒordainedÓ law, just as the preamble to the US Constitution clearly states. As we are about to

!617
discover that True christianity of piety and conscious is a negative part of the common law,
meaning that each man is expected to learn and act the scriptural part and maintain that negative
duty of the Natural Law, it isn’t so easy for the average common fool (like myself) to dismiss the
Bible and its scriptural Higher Law any more. You will have religion whether you like it or not as
your law. The only question is which one, which law, which God do you choose.

There are thousands of unique corporations calling themselves “religions” on this planet, all of
which have residence within the hundreds of municipal governments that surround, control,
create, and profess them. But none of them are required to have “God” as their magistrate or God’s
Law as their government. These two realms (government and religion) have always, in all of
history, been married. Organized religion has nothing to do with Jehovah or God’s Law of Nature,
but only establishes manÕs legal relationship with a legal deÞnition of ÒGodÓ under the rule of
other men (magistrates). Religion by any other name (“government”) is still a part of legal religion;
or more to the point, government is merely the executive (military) force of any religion called a
State. The name of ÒGodÓ only appears in government as a personiÞcation, the noun form of the
verb of Being, as the root of authoritarian rule by men in God’s “name” as a legal appearance; the
form of God with no substance.

And the money says: ‘IN GOD WE TRUST.’ Amen!

—=—

“And he said unto them in his doctrine, Beware of the scribes, which
love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the marketplaces,
And the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at
feasts: Which devour widows' houses, AND FOR A PRETENSE MAKE
LONG PRAYERS: these shall receive greater damnation.”
—Mark 12: 38-41, KJB

—=—

We mistake the concept of the “separation of church and state” to mean something other than it
does in the United States. When a husband and wife that are voluntarily bound to each other in a
legal marriage contract get a separation, they are still legally in contract with one another under
marriage. This is not an annulment. The binding relationship of incorporation (marriage) still
exists to the state. The union is not severed, only restricted and often ignored as a state of “divorce,”
which is still a lesser state of marriage. And this is why government stands as controller and
administrator of the child (issue/product) of that marriage (incorporation of persons), deciding
against the will of the Natural parents where and when they may possess their abandoned child.
And this is also why the male or father Þgure of that corporation of marriage, listed as head of
household (corporation), is forced to Þnancially support his issue (sub-corporation) with Òchild-
support.”

The separation of religious morals from political opinions (Þctions) as law is nothing to celebrate, I
assure you. Government is based solely on personhood, on artiÞcial status and rank. This realm of
artiÞciality can only exist if the Bible (the self-evident Law of God) is forcibly separated from the
political (imaginary) sphere (the legal law and designs of man), as God does not respect persons
and plainly out-Laws their legal existence. So it is that the state is “separated” from the church, but
still married. For the state must invoke religious moral doctrine (the Bible) to claim the authority of
God as replacement (vicar) magistrates in Order to govern men in God’s empty name. The notion
of being a “Christian Nation” is indeed a blasphemy of the scriptures, for a nation is only ever an
artiÞcial person (corporation). Of course, man must rename and redeÞne God as a legal thing
before he can establish God as a Source of all legal power and jurisdiction.

!618
 FIDES - Latin. Faith; honesty; conÞdence; TRUST; veracity; honor. Occurring in the phrases
"bona Þdes" (good faith), "mala Þdes" (bad faith), and "uberrima Þdee," (the utmost or most
abundant good faith.) (Black4)

—=—

“A trust is an obligation of conscience OF ONE TO THE WILL OF

ANOTHER.”
—FIDES EST OBLIGATIO CONSCIENTAE ALICUJUS AD INTENTIONEM ALTERIUS. Bacon. (Black4)

—=—

A vow (promise) to God is a Natural Trust in God to do the Will of God according the Last Will and
Testament. An oath to the state is the same exact thing, only the god has changed.

And the use of money that states ÒIN GOD WE TRUSTÓ while in the artiÞce of public commerce
means only that we are acting as agent to the principal god of that nations currency.

A man might declare separation from his wife by sticking her in a virtual box and ignoring her
pleas (prayers). This is what government has done with God’s Law, for the duality of religious
morals and political ethics no longer check and balance one another. Religions of today are merely
political corporations created by government, considered only as creations of government and
legally governed as such. Their legal standing is under government rule, not above or even equal to
it, for churches are non-governing legal entities. They have as much authority in politics as
Walmart, and are quite often restricted from political involvement without forming a political
action committee or legal, corporate, non-proÞt lobby. The religious wife as the ÒchurchÓ is stuck in
a box, her voice no longer able to reach her overbearing husband, the “state.” The municipal state is
Godless even as it claims the authority of God through a marriage to its doctrine in principle but
not practice.

PURGE - To clear of a charge by one’s own OATH; as, to the satisfaction of a court that by a
certain act NO CONTEMPT WAS INTENDED. See Contempt. (WCA1889)

—=—

Ironically, a spiritual man of God can have no other standing than to Be in contempt of court. For
the court is a legal creation of men, not a Natural Creation of God. Its judgements are as false as its
law. The court can only recognize Þctions in artiÞce, that which appears only in a government-
granted legal name and title, and so the court itself stands in contempt of God’s Nature and Law,
and speciÞcally to that of manÕs actual substance (as part of Creation) in Nature. To pledge oneÕs
religious oath to the state and in court is literally to place God into contempt by accepting the legal
law and its gods over the Natural Law, the Þction over the Reality. And in case you never noticed,
EVERY TIME you go to court you must Þrst pledge your oath of fealty and respect to it and its
system of legal law, so that if you later Þnd it to be contemptuous during that legal ceremony of
false religion you may not act upon your moral thought. The oath as a contract is like a mousetrap,
causing the man to be stuck to the courts jurisdiction and opinions by invoking the strawman and
binding its appearance in surety until dismissed, adjudged, or convicted through that promise
(oath) to the court to be subject to its artiÞcial law Ôso help me God.’ All oaths are only ever religious
oaths. There are no exceptions. And an oath to the court is the abandonment of one’s own religion
by agreement to the acceptance of that law and religion to which the oath is taken. And the court’s
religion, to be clear, is Roman paganism; the false “Christianity” of natural fools.

But let us see the evidence once and for all of this dualistic term of art.

!619
 SO HELP YOU GOD - See OATH. See Christianity; Law, Divine; Religion. (WCA1889)

CHRISTIAN - One who BELIEVES OR ASSENTS to the doctrines of Christianity, as taught

by Jesus Christ in the New Testament, OR WHO, BEING BORN OF CHRISTIAN PARENTS
OR IN A CHRISTIAN COUNTRY, DOES NOT PROFESS ANY OTHER RELIGION, OR
DOES NOT BELONG TO ANY ONE OF THE OTHER RELIGIOUS DIVISIONS OF MAN.
See NAME. (WCA1889)

CHRISTIANITY - The system of doctrines and precepts taught by Christ; the religion
founded by Christ. CHRISTIANITY IS SAID TO BE PART OF THE COMMON LAW.
“Christianity is parcel of the laws of England; and, therefore, to reproach the Christian
religion is to speak in subversion of the law.” “The essential principles of NATURAL
RELIGION” and “of revealed religion, ARE A PART OF THE COMMON LAW, so that any
person reviling or subverting or ridiculing them may be prosecuted at common law.” “The
true sense of the maxim is that the law will not permit the essential principles of revealed
religion to be ridiculed and reviled.” Christianity is A PART OF THE COMMON LAW OF
PENNSYLVANIA in the qualiÞed sense that its divine origin and truth are admitted, and
therefore it is not to be maliciously and openly reviled and blasphemed against, to the
annoyance of believers or the injury of the public. NOT CHRISTIANITY FOUNDED UPON
ANY PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS TENETS; BUT CHRISTIANITY WITH LIBERTY OF
CONSCIENCE TO ALL MEN. THE MAXIM DOES NOT MEAN THAT CHRISTIANITY IS
AN ESTABLISHED RELIGION; NOR THAT ITS PRECEPTS, BY FORCE OF THEIR OWN
AUTHORITY, FORM PART OF OUR SYSTEM OF MUNICIPAL LAW; NOR THAT THE
COURTS MAY BASE THEIR JUDGMENTS UPON THE BIBLE; NOR THAT RELIGIOUS
DUTIES MAY BE PENALLY ENFORCED; NOR THAT LEGAL DISCRIMINATION IN
FAVOR OF CHRISTIANITY IS ALLOWED. The best features of the common law, especially
those which regard the family and social relations, if not derived from, have at least been
improved and strengthened by, the prevailing religion and the teachings of its sacred Book.
BUT THE LAW DOES NOT ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE THE PRECEPTS OF
CHRISTIANITY ON THE GROUND OF THEIR SACRED CHARACTER OR DIVINE
ORIGIN. Some of those precepts, though we may admit their continual and universal
obligation, we must nevertheless recognize as being INCAPABLE OF ENFORCEMENT BY
HUMAN LAWS. Those precepts, moreover, affect the heart, and address themselves to the
conscience; WHILE THE LAWS OF THE STATE CAN REGARD THE OUTWARD
CONDUCT ONLY: FOR WHICH REASONS CHRISTIANITY IS NOT A PART OF THE
LAW OF THE LAND IN ANY SENSE WHICH ENTITLES THE COURTS TO TAKE
NOTICE OF AND BASE THEIR JUDGMENTS UPON IT, except so far they can Þnd that its
precepts and principles have been incorporated in and made a component part of the law of
the State. THE MAXIM CAN HAVE NO REFERENCE TO THE LAW OF THE NATIONAL
GOVERNMENT, SINCE THE SOURCES OF THAT LAW ARE THE CONSTITUTION,
TREATIES, AND ACTS OF CONGRESS. (WCA1889)

—=—

If the reader may understand what has been stated here then he may understand why his public
birth into and conÞrmed participation in the performance debt of the surname and number of the
nation causes two things to happen. Firstly, his artiÞcial birth certiÞcation creates a legal (anti-God)
registered entity (strawman) that he acts as agent for, and so he is automatically given at birth a
legalized ßattering title of ÒChristianÓ just as it was in Rome, for he lives in one of CaesarÕs so-
called “Christian” nations. This is a false state of being that defeats and defects the Natural Law
and Religion established by the Son (Word) of God. Secondly, this false religious ÒstateÓ or country
being a pure Þction causes the man to lose his unalienable rights under God, which would be his
privately reserved rights if he were not a commercial resident and foreigner in any State (People)
and their government (state) through the United States (nation/domicile) in agency, and his only
True christian “identity” would be in his works and in his following of that Highest Law without
actual title, not merely in his incorporated name of the state. Thus this notion of the separation of

!620
church and state could be said to be a separation of the public (common people) and the private
(sovereign People). Regardless of this, there is one fact that cannot be disputed. That the common
law includes True christianity without corporatized religion as its foundation of voluntary Law
means that the reader better damn well stop demonizing the Bible and instead learn its precepts
and maxims if he ever wishes to be free from the tyranny of the nation (state) that opposes that
recognized, internal expression of the moral law.

—=—

“Our Jewishness is not a creed, IT IS OURSELF, OUR TOTALITY.

Indeed, it may be fairly said that the surest evidence of your lack of
seriousness in religion is the fact that YOUR RELIGIONS ARE NOT
NATIONAL, THAT YOU ARE NOT COMPROMISED AND
DEDICATED, EN MASSE, TO THE FAITH.”

“You have had patron or appropriated gods: we have a national God. In

the heart of any pious Jew, God is a Jew. Is your God an Englishman or
an American? There is no real contradiction between this confessed
anthropomorphism and my claim that we Jews alone understand and
feel the universality of God. IN ANTHROPOMORPHISM WE MERELY
SYMBOLIZE GOD: we reduce the inÞnite, temporarily, to tangible
proportions: we make it ACCESSIBLE TO DAILY REFERENCE.”
—Maurice Samuel, from: ‘You Gentiles,’ 1924, separate quotes

—=—

The time for ignoring the Law (the scripture) must become a thing of the past. The foolish debates
must end, and the Reality of this not-so-secret Truth must be revealed. Only an arrogant fool would
dismiss this information and go back to being a ßatteringly legally ÒChristianÓ (pagan), public
citizenship in the dark without even contemplating his personal, adversarial disposition. The ofÞce
of citizenship is a ÒChristianÓ ofÞce of the ÒChristianÓ nation (false church/People). It is, again,
merely controlled opposition. And it’s all in the name…

—=—

NAME: 


“A DESIGNATION by which a PERSON, NATURAL OR ARTIFICIAL,

is known… the law assumes that EVERYONE has a Christian name…
The law recognizes only one Christian name… A non-resident, to whom
a wrong name is given in an order of publication, receives no legal
notice… IDENTITY OF NAME IS PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF
IDENTITY OF PERSON… At common law, a man may lawfully change
his name. HE IS BOUND BY ANY CONTRACT INTO WHICH HE
MAY ENTER IN HIS ADOPTED OR REPUTED NAME, and by his

!621
 recognized name he may sue and be sued… 2. A man’s name, AS THE
SYNONYM OF HIS POWER AND PERSONALITY, IS OFTEN PUT
FOR THE MAN HIMSELF. Thus, AN AGENT IS SAID TO BUY “IN
THE NAME” OF HIS PRINCIPAL when he buys for him, DECLARING
HIS AGENCY. A man invests "in his own name" (as executor) when he
invests openly for himself, THOUGH HE ONLY RECEIVES EVIDENCE
(BONDS) OF THE INVESTMENT.”
ÑDeÞnition of ÒnameÓ (WCA1889)

—=—

The King James Version of the Holy Bible is the foundation of the governing law, and the ofÞcial (in
ofÞce) oath is still taken upon it, or more aptly through it. This is not a vow or promise to God to
follow the Natural Law of God, but a vain promise to the state (and thus the pope?) and its false
law in GodÕs empty name only. The vow (promise) is a verb, the oath (or afÞrmation) a written
noun. The vow is to God. The oath is a spite on God. One is in Love (Belief), while the other is just
empty words. A vow to God is sacred, while an oath to the gods (magistrates) of the state taken
upon the Bible (GodÕs Word) is a curse. The scriptures as GodÕs Law are suppressed and ignored by
the municipal, administrative state and courts in every way and in all of its legal presentation and
consideration of what legally is the law of the land. Scripture nor christ is in fact no part whatsoever
a part of the law of the land, as stated above, except for those Highest foundational maxims
(principles) that already happen to be based on scripture. But remember, contract makes the law,
and the Bible tells us to make none. The legal law implies the power and authority of the Word
(Law) for its existence and thus to control the minds of the unregenerate, unspiritual masses, which
its own corrupt systems ensure the nature of, recognizing only the individual actions of the man in
agency of its own version of his animal (without soul), humanized, Romanized self (strawman).
This is the purpose of the contract, and speciÞcally the implied contractual relationship of citizen-
ship. The contract makes the new law and rejects all others. In this way, the union of church and
state has become a paradoxical puzzle with no internal solution, like a husband pretending his wife
no longer Exists. It is a legal matrix with no escape, and no actual remedy for its debtors unless
they unplug and quit using its personiÞed avatar. For the church is governed by the state, which
stands as the master and oppressor of its moral law. The Existence of a moral code of law has been
relegated (exiled) into obscurity, locked away as a secured interest, considered as merely a
referential to the supposed authority it grants to the corrupting state. The state rules despite the
religious Law-book it claims as its authority to rule by. The Ying ignores the Yang, ultimately
overcoming, usurping, and misdirecting its balancing purpose.

We see this as a rule, a principle (maxim) of law excluding other principles according to the
corruptive elements of legalism and administrative functionaries. Remembering that Jesus christ is
an example of the Perfection and execution of Law, as the Word of God personiÞed, we must take
heed of the following Latin maxim so that we may know that our subjection to manÕs legalisms
causes us to suffer separation from our Highest and most Perfect ability of Being. A strawmanÕs law
is purely of corruption; purely antichrist.

—=—

“Judgment is to be given according to the laws, NOT ACCORDING TO

EXAMPLES OR PRECEDENTS.”
ÑJUDICANDUM EST LEGIBUS, NON EXEMPLIS. 4 Coke, 33b; 4 B1,Comm. 405. (Black4)

—=—

!622
The legal law has been made to literally emasculate man (male and female) from our substance and
Source, from the precedent and example that is the wisdom of Light of Jehovah. And person-hood
ensures this legal castration, acting as a barrier between man and his Creator and Creation, so that
man may no longer operate under the scriptural, spiritual Law of God.

EMASCULATE - verb transitive - [Low Latin emasculo, from e and masculus, a male. See Male.]
1. To castrate; to deprive a male of certain parts which characterize the sex; to geld; to deprive
of virility. 2. To deprive of masculine strength or vigor; to weaken; to render effeminate; to
vitiate by unmanly softness. WOMEN EMASCULATE A MONARCH'S REIGN. To
emasculate the SPIRITS. - adjective - Unmanned; deprived of vigor. (Webs1828)

—=—

Remember, a person has no Òsex,Ó only the legal Þction of sexual orientation as status. A person is
to be always legal (artiÞcial) in all considerations, which eliminates GodÕs Design and Gift of any
Real sexual consideration. Sex is only used as a weapon in the legal realm, never as the recognized
wonder and beauty that is GodÕs Creation.

The queen emasculates the king, so that his reign is not overbearingly logical, un-empathetic, or
heartless. The sacred balance is the power of the feminine, not above or below, but in perfect
harmony with the masculine. Behind every good male is his match both in grace and in inßuence, in
empathy and in maternal instinct. And behind every good female is her perfecting male opposite,
though admittedly perhaps, a bit less graceful and spiritually wise. This is the epitome of Natural
Law and Order, of True and spiritual equitableness under the Law.

Another word for emasculate, in that legal (artiÞcial) sense, is the word castrate. To rate man in a
caste system, just as Hollywood casts its actors and assigns them desired traits and characters…
This is how word magic is caste:

CASTRATE - verb transitive - 1. To geld; to deprive of the testicles; to emasculate. 2. To take

away or retrench, as the obscene parts OF A WRITING. 3. To take out a leaf or sheet from a
book, AND RENDER IT IMPERFECT. (Webs1828)

RATE - noun - [Latin ratus, reor, contracted from retor, redor, or resor. See Ratio and Reason.] 1.
The proportion or standard by which quantity or value is adjusted; as silver valued at the
rate of six shillings and eight pence the ounce. The rate and standard of wit was different then
from what it is in these days. 2. PRICE OR AMOUNT STATED OR FIXED ON ANY THING.
A king may purchase territory at too dear a rate The rate of interest is prescribed by law. 3.
Settled allowance; as a daily rate of provisions. 2 Kings 25:30. 4. DEGREE; comparative height
or value. I am a spirit of no common rate. In this did his holiness and godliness appear above
the rate and pitch of other men's, in that he was so inÞnitely merciful. 5. Degree in which any
thing is done. The ship sails at the rate of seven knots an hour. Many of the horse could not
march at that rate nor come up soon enough. 6. DEGREE OF VALUE; PRICE. Wheat in
England is often sold at the rate of Þfty shillings the quarter. Wit may be purchased at too dear
a rate 7. A TAX OR SUM ASSESSED BY AUTHORITY ON PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE,
according to its income or value; as parish rates; town rates; highway rates. 8. In the navy, the
order or class of a SHIP, according to its magnitude or force… - verb transitive - 1. To set a
certain value on; TO VALUE AT A CERTAIN PRICE OR DEGREE OF EXCELLENCE. You
seem not high enough your joys to rate. Instead of rating the man by his performances, we too
frequently rate the performance by the man. 2. To Þx the magnitude, force or order, as of
SHIPS. A ship is rated in the Þrst class, or as a ship of the line. - verb intransitive - 1. TO BE SET
OR CONSIDERED IN A CLASS, AS A SHIP. The ship rates as a ship of the line. 2. To make
an estimate. - verb transitive - [See Read. It is probably allied to rattle, and perhaps to Latin
rudo.] To chide with vehemence; to reprove; to scold; to censure violently. Go, rate thy
minions, proud insulting boy. An old lord of the council rated me the other day in the street
about you, sir. (Webs1828)

!623
CAST - verb transitive preterit tense - And participle passive - cast. 1. To throw, ßing or send; that
is, to drive from, by force, as from the hand, or from an engine... To sow; to scatter seed… To
drive or impel by violence. A mighty west wind cast the locusts into the sea. Exodus 10:19. 4.
To shed or throw off; as, trees cast their fruit; a serpent casts his skinÉ 6. To throw, as dice or
lots; as, TO CAST LOTS. 7. To throw on the ground, as in wrestling. 8. To throw away, as
worthlessÉ10. To throw, to extend, as a trench or rampart, including the sense of digging,
raising, or FORMING. Thy enemies shall cast a trench about thee. Luke 19:35. 11. To thrust;
as, TO CAST INTO PRISON. 12. To put, or SET, IN A PARTICULAR STATE. Both chariot
and horse were cast into a dead sleep. Psalms 76:6. 13. TO CONDEMN; TO CONVICT; AS A
CRIMINAL. Both tried and both were cast. 14. To overcome in a civil suit, or in any contest of
strength or skill; as, to cast the defendant or an antagonist. 15. To cashier or discard. 16. To lay
aside, as unÞt for use; to reject; as a garment. 17. To make to preponderate; to throw into one
scale, for the purpose of giving it superior weight; to decide by a vote that gives a superiority
in numbers; as, to cast the balance in oneÕs favor; a casting vote or voice. 18. To throw together
several particulars, to Þnd the SUM; as, to cast accounts. Hence, to throw together
circumstances and facts, to Þnd the result; to compute; to reckon; to calculate; as, to cast the
event of war. To cast and see how many things there are which a man cannot do himself. 19. TO
CONTRIVE; TO PLAN. 20. TO JUDGE, or to consider, in order to judge. 21. TO FIX, or
distribute the parts of a play among the actors. 22. To throw, as the sight; to direct, or turn, as
the eye; to glance; as, to cast a look, or glance, or the eye. 23. TO FOUND; to form into a
particular shape, by pouring liquid metal into a mold; to run; as, to cast cannon. Thou shalt cast
four rings of gold for it. Exodus 25:12. 24. Figuratively, to shape; to form by a model. 25. TO
COMMUNICATE; to spread over; as, to cast a luster UPON POSTERITY; to cast splendor
upon actions, or light upon a subjectÉ To cast down, to throw down; TO DEJECT OR
DEPRESS THE MIND. Why art thou cast down, O my soul. Psalms 42:5É Among huntsmen,
to leave behind, as dogs; to set loose, or free. Among seamen, to loose, or untie. To cast out, to
send forth; to reject or turn out; to throw out, as words; to speak or give vent to. To cast up, to
compute; to reckon; to calculate; as, to cast up accounts, or the cost. Also, to eject; to vomit. To
cast on, to refer or resign to. TO CAST ONE’S SELF ON, TO RESIGN OR YIELD ONE’S
SELF TO THE DISPOSAL OF, without reserve. To cast young, to miscarry; to suffer abortion.
Genesis 31:38. To cast in the teeth, to upbraid; TO CHARGE; to twit. So in Danish, kaster in I
noesen, to cast in the nose. - verb intransitive - 1. To throw forward, as the thoughts, with a view
to some determination; or to turn or revolve in the mind; to contrive; sometimes followed by
about. I cast in careful mind to seek her out. To cast about how to perform or obtain. 2. To
receive form or shape. Metal will cast and mold. 3. To warp; to twist from regular shape. Stuff
is said to cast or warp, when it alters its ßatness or straightness. Note. Cast like throw and
warp, implies a winding motionÉ - noun - 1. The act of casting; a throw; the thing thrown; the
form or state of throwing; kind or manner of throwingÉ 5. A throw of dice; hence, a state of
chance or hazard. It is an even cast whether the army should march this way or that way. Hence
the phrase, the last cast is used to denote that all is ventured on one throw, or one effort. 6.
FORM; SHAPE. A heroic poem in another cast. 7. A TINGE; A SLIGHT COLORING, or slight
degree of a color; as a cast of green. Hence, a slight alteration in external appearanceÉ 8.
Manner; air; mien; as, a peculiar cast of countenanceÉ 9. A ßight; a number of hawks let go at
once. 10. A small statue of bronze... 14. A breed, race, lineage, kind, sort. 15. In Hindoostan, A
TRIBE OR CLASS OF THE SAME RANK OR PROFESSION; as the cast of Bramins, or
priests; of rajahs, or princes; of choutres, OR ARTIFICERS; and of parias, or poor people. Or
according to some writers, of Bramins; of cuttery, or soldiers; of shuddery, or merchants; and of
wyse, or mechanics. The four casts of the Hindoos are the Brahmins or sacred order; the
Chechteres or soldiers and rulers; the Bice, Vaissya, or husbandmen and merchants; and the
Sooders, Sudras, or laborers and mechanics. 16. A TRICK. (Webs1828)

CAST - verb - In old English practice. To allege, offer, or present; to proffer by way of excuse
(as to "cast an essoinÓ). This word is now used as a popular, rather than a technical, term, in the
sense of TO OVERCOME, OVERTHROW, or defeat in a civil action at law. It also means to
deposit formally or ofÞcially. It is also used in connection with the imposition upon a party
litigant of costs in the suit: as, A. is "cast" for the costs of the case. (Black4)

!624
 LOT - A number of ASSOCIATED PERSONS OR THINGS TAKEN COLLECTIVELY. A
share; one of several parcels into which property is divided. Any portion, piece, division or
parcel of land. Fractional part or subdivision of block, according to plat or survey; portion of
platted territory measured and set apart for individual and private use and occupancy; right
of way of street railway abutting a public highway; small tract or parcel of land in a village,
town, or city, suitable for building, or for a garden, or other similar uses. The arbitrament of
chance: hazard. That which fortuitously determines WHAT COURSE SHALL BE TAKEN
OR WHAT DISPOSITION BE MADE OF PROPERTY OR RIGHTS. The thirteenth dish of
lead in the mines of Derbyshire, which belonged to the crown. (Black4)

LOT AND SCOT - In English law. Certain DUTIES WHICH MUST BE PAID BY THOSE
WHO CLAIM TO EXERCISE THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE within certain cities and
boroughs, before they are ENTITLED TO VOTE. It is said that the practice became uniform
to refer to the poor-rate as a REGISTER of "scot and lot" voters; so that the term, when
employed to deÞne a right of election, meant only the payment by a parishioner of the sum
to which he was assessed on the poor-rate. (Black4)

—=—

To cast a spell, as the spelling of artful, Þctional wordsÉ Our lot is cast and our stake (cross) is
planted, as soon as the birth registration process is complete. We are immediately presumed to be
emasculated, cast-rated into the multitude of the nation, that Þctional, legal father of lost souls. The
people borne of and begotten by the nation, as the general public, the goyimÉ

The New World Encyclopedia deÞnes a caste system as follows:

“Caste systems are any ranked, hereditary, endogamous occupational groups that
CONSTITUTE traditional societies in certain regions of the world, particularly among Hindus
in India. There, caste is rooted in antiquity and speciÞes THE RULES AND RESTRICTIONS
GOVERNING SOCIAL INTERCOURSE AND ACTIVITY FOR EACH GROUP BASED ON
THEIR OCCUPATION AND SOCIAL STATUS. The different castes practiced mutual
exclusion in many social activities, including eating, as well as MARRIAGE. In addition to
the major castes, there also existed another group, the ‘OUTCASTES,’ who were relegated to
the worst occupations if any employment at all. Ranked below the castes, they were treated
as sub-human—‘unseeable’ and ‘untouchableÕÉ

ÒDeÞnition - Caste is deÞned by the American Heritage Dictionary as Ôan endogamous and
hereditary social group LIMITED TO PERSONS OF THE SAME RANK, occupation, and
economic position.’ The word caste is derived from the ROMANCE word casta (seen in
Portuguese, Spanish, and Italian), which (in addition to representing the same concept as
English caste) can mean ÔLINEAGE’ or ‘race.’ It comes from Romance casto, which can mean
‘PURE’ or ‘chaste.’ Casto in Latin means "chaste," which is derived from castus, meaning ‘PURE,
CUT OFF, SEPARATED.’”

ÒÉIn its broadest sense, examples of caste-based societies include colonial Latin America under
Spanish and Portuguese rule, Japan, Korea, some parts of Africa, as well as across the Indian
subcontinent.”

“Many of these cultures show only the remnants of a caste system that divided the population
into what might today be regarded as different social classes, BASED ON LINEAGe and on
the role they performed in society. What remains, however, and is common to many cultures is
the ‘outcaste,’ the people considered below the level of common humanity of all the others,
‘untouchable.’ They and their descendants, the dalit in India, the burakumin in Japan, the
baekjeong in Korea, all have faced discrimination, and some continue to do so today.”

—=—

!625
One would have to be a fool to not recognize the caste system in America. The private or pure-
blood against the public or outcastes (those not of the bloodline or having knowledge of it, those
not the private People as the sovereignty of each separate State). A caste by any other name or
description is still just the same old feudatory.

As a consideration by government, man is much like oil. This naturally ßowing blood of the Earth
is called a “natural resource.” Again we see the referential to the quality of Nature as purely a
descriptive matter, not as the main subject. When attached to a legal concept, that being a resource,
the purpose and intention of the word natural changes from one of respect to one of conquest
(purchase). To re-source something necessarily means to re-purpose it; to reÞne and therefore re-
create it and to alter its intent for the service and beneÞt of another. And once Nature is touched, it
is no longer of the Source of God’s Being of Creation. Oil is re-sourced from being a pure creation of
God in Nature to an unnatural, impure re-creation of man. Ironically, it is the very imperfections of
Source that are Þltered out to make oil artiÞcially ÒpureÓ and legally Ònatural.Ó So too may this be
said about man.

This is the perfect allegory of the re-presentation of man into the personhood of citizenship. To
make gasoline, for instance, requires a major reÞnement process to rid the oil of many of its
undesirable Natural qualities and traits so that it can be used (employed) and trafÞcked as a
commercial re-source…

Sound familiar?

The same can be said of the blood of man. For the man to be made into a citizen-ship he must be
metaphorically re-sourced as well. Man must be taken away from his Source (his Creator) and its
Law and re-generated into a Þctional persona; a useable (employable) re-sourced product for
commercial human trafÞcking. His blood must be legally (Þguratively) corrupted in attainder. He
must be reÞned through the public education and media brainwashing process before he can be
used (employed) as a natural resource in capitalism (by the head): a natural person. Once this re-
Þne-ment process (corruption of blood and the mind through institutionalized ÒeducationÓ) takes
place, the newly formed persona no longer expresses the Pure qualities of God’s Nature, retaining
only the form without substance, yet still appearing as man-like (as man-kind) while acting in
persona.

We may also reference gold here, where the quality of that natural resource is measured in the
Þneness of the art form (technology) that molded and pressed it, be it for coinage, jewelry, or as a
legally deÞned ÒnaturalÓ resource in machinery and health products. Likewise, a man perfectly
educated and publicly im-pressed (published) into society through this re-Þning process as a
political entity is considered as quite the valuable commodity, a Þne speci-man, a natural re-source
exploited and perfectly employed in mammon. A hu-man commodity for hu-man trafÞcking.

Like crude, unreÞned oil, man is born by his blood as a product of Nature. Like gasoline, the
publicly educated HU-man person/citizen is a reÞned product of man’s designs in mammon.

To be even more clear, the true purpose of this speciÞc magi-cal spell (spelling) of legal words is
quite simplistic. Every Living and non-Living thing on this earth is merely animal, vegetable, and/
or mineral in Nature, so to speak. As all of these Creatures (Create-ure = the Created things of God)
do not comprehend the legal meaning of these Þctional, artful names (nouns) that have been forced
upon them within the legal language domain as used to de-scribe them into this governing
nomenclature, all of the Creatures as Natural Beings of the Earth (as Jehovah) have no choice but to
be dominated by man. The name is governed as a Þctional and invisible bond; a virtual ball and
chain attached and applied to the Real thing. They cannot de-fend themselves; they cannot fend off
this legal Þction any more than oil can prevent itself from being sucked dry from JehovahÕs Veins.
These creatures don’t speak the legal language. For they have no legal capacity. They are not
volunteers such as man. They do not possess higher reason and therefore do not possess the
sanctions and responsibility of choice.

!626
However, in most cases, man has the ability and capacity to learn this magi-cal language but
generally chooses not to, while at the same time he chooses to (or believes he must) follow the law
that is made up of those same unlearned words. And so man in his less than blissful ignorance is
no better off and is considered no differently than all other voiceless (without choice) animals to be
dominated. Beasts of burden. For, as the maxim states, the meaning of words is the spirit of the law.
Man's education in common (vulgar) words mean nothing to these legal magistrates, for man has
been taught the language of Babel. General words and terms in dog-Latin appear in their form the
same as in the legalese, but the meanings are most often opposite of the loving and truthful
intention of those common words.

And here we can comprehend the desire and consecrated effort by those governing men to instill a
forced, “public” education system. For those who seek to rule all men must keep us all acting and
speaking publicly. Privacy is simply not taught to slaves.

And so we are taught the lower form of language, one without metaphoric or higher (more
authoritative) meaning, so that we may never read the Law (scripture or legalese) to realize that we
are trapped in the artiÞce; caught in a legal matrix. We are informed to accept the big lie…

FICTION OF LAW - Something known to be false is assumed to be true. (Black4)

FICTION - An assumption or supposition of law that something which is or may be false is

true, or that a state of facts exists which has never really taken place. An assumption, for
purposes of justice, of a fact that does not or may not exist. A rule of law which assumes as
true, and will not allow to be disproved, something which is false, but not impossible.
These assumptions are of an innocent or even beneÞcial character, and are made for the
advancement of the ends of justice. They secure this end chießy by the extension of procedure
from cases to which it is applicable to other cases to which it is not strictly applicable, the
ground of inapplicability being some difference of an immaterial character. Fictions are to be
distinguished from presumptions of law. By the former (Þction), SOMETHING KNOWN
TO BE FALSE OR UNREAL IS ASSUMED AS TRUE; by the latter (presumption), AN
INFERENCE IS SET UP WHICH MAY BE AND PROBABLY IS TRUE, but which, at any
rate, THE LAW WILL NOT PERMIT TO BE CONTROVERTED. It may also be said that a
presumption is a rule of law prescribed for the purpose of getting at a certain conclusion,
though arbitrary, where the subject is intrinsically liable to doubt from the remoteness,
discrepancy, or actual defect of proofs. Fictions are also to be distinguished from estoppels: an
estoppel being the rule by which A PERSON IS PRECLUDED FROM ASSERTING A FACT
by previous conduct inconsistent therewith on his own part or the part of those under
whom he claims, OR BY AN ADJUDICATION UPON HIS RIGHTS WHICH HE CANNOT
BE ALLOWED TO QUESTION. Best distinguishes legal Þctions from presumptions juris et de
lure, and divides them into three kinds, afÞrmative or positive Þctions, negative Þctions, and
Þctions by relation. (Black4)

—=—

So what then is the difference between the notion of the law as Þction and that of a Þction of law and
that of the word deceit?

ThatÕs just itÉ there is no difference! A Þction of law is a creation of an already Þctional law. It is
only that these acts of Þction and Þctions of law are somehow legal while open deceit is not. And so
a Þction of law is really just a personiÞcation of deceit, of the devil, a lie re-presented as a person,
place, or thing. Words that deceiveÉ

Is citizenship a Þction of law or a deceit?

That question, my friends, can only be answered by you. For you either call it fraud in deceit, or
you conÞrm and ratify the deceit as an accepted and agreed upon Þction of law. Under GodÕs Law,

!627
it is deceit. Under the Þctional legal gods and their created legal (opposed to God) laws, it is merely
a part of the legally licensed and permitted Þction of the law of persons. Here we Þnd either pain
(Truth) or comfort (delusion) in words, for deceit by any other nameÉ

DECEIT - A fraudulent and CHEATING MISREPRESENTATION, ARTIFICE, or device,

used by one or more persons to deceive and trick another, who is ignorant of the true facts,
to the prejudice and damage of the party imposed upon. A fraudulent misrepresentation or
contrivance, by which one man deceives another, who has no means of detecting the fraud,
to the injury and damage of the latter. A SUBTLE TRICK OR DEVICE, whereunto may be
referred all manner of CRAFT and collusion used to deceive and defraud another by any
means whatsoever, which hath no other or more proper name than deceit to distinguish the
offense. A "deceit" is either: (1) The suggestion, AS A FACT, OF THAT WHICH IS NOT
TRUE, by one who does not believe it to be true; (2) the assertion, AS A FACT, of that which
is not true, by one who has no reasonable ground for believing it to be true; (3) THE
SUPPRESSION OF A FACT, by one who is bound to disclose it, or who gives information
of other facts which are likely to mislead for want of communication of that fact: or (4) a
promise, made without any intention of performing it. To constitute Òdeceit,Ó the statement
must be untrue, made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless and conscious
ignorance thereof, especially if parties are not on equal terms, made with intent that plaintiff
act thereon or in a manner apparently Þtted to induce him to act thereon, and plaintiff must
act in reliance on the statement in the manner contemplated, or manifestly probable, to his
injury. The essential elements of "deceit" are REPRESENTATION, falsity, scienter,
DECEPTION, and injury. (Black4)

—=—

A celebrated, accepted, worshiped, and conÞrmed deceit is still only ever a deceit; a big lie; a
satanic (adversarial to GodÕs Nature) truth. Yet this is how we live our lives, in the accepted Self-
deceit of person-hood in a citizen-ship.

It is difÞcult to think that a lie such as manÕs legal law may possess an opinion or presumption of
its own. As with any artiÞcial intelligence, that living lie may only contemplate that for which it is
pre-programmed. And so we must realize that the whole of the law is based on presumption and
on consent, and therefore is a voluntary state by man of permanent acceptance of this legal status of
personhood. To say that the law presumes these things is no more ridiculous than to say that Bugs
Bunny loves to eat carrots or that Santa Claus keeps a naughty and nice list. It is belief (love) in the
lie, not the fact that it is a lie, that creates the existence and subsistence of the lie as law and custom.

We literally grow up believing in and therefore living in the big lie.

—=—

“‘Presumption’ or ‘presumed’ means that the trier of fact MUST Þnd the
EXISTENCE of the fact presumed UNLESS and UNTIL evidence is
introduced which would support a Þnding of its NONEXISTENCE.”
ÑUniform Commercial Code (UCC) 1-201 DeÞnitions #31

—=—

If the entire ÒpositiveÓ legal law is Þction, being only in a state of existence based purely upon
assumption and presumption, and the entire government is thus a Þction of law (deceit)É well,
you do the math!

How do you defeat the darkness of a complete and total lie?

!628
Flood it with God’s Light (Knowledge of Law) in the total Reality of Nature and Live only in the
knowledge thereof!!! Rebut every presumption as nonexistent. Correct the statement of blood
origin blasphemed by the birth record. And never live as a lie under man’s law, in his person, or in
his commercial sphere again.

But I digress…

A person is a legal Þction, a creation of law, which is also but a Þction (deceit) of man. And it is
automatically presumed that man in agency is operating in commerce through this Þctional
persona (legal mask) at all times in its existence. It is not something that is active or inactive, its time
clock is 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including holidays. Man therefore operates in a false
persona that is assumed to be both his true intent and his true identity by the legally governing
creator (generator, begetter) of that false Þctional title. Consent and acceptance is always a
presumption of citizenship. To claim to be a citizen of the United States for protection or mere show
is the same as claiming to fall under the laws of the United States and to be legally (positively)
immune from God’s Laws of Nature. Man’s relation to the person in surety is purely a presumption
of law (of the legal creator). It is literally a strawman argument!

Once man claims to be this permanent legal name as a commercial Þction of law and signs in its
name, a creation of and thus property and under government, he has placed himself into a state of
unavoidable estoppel regarding his Natural Liberty under God. The acceptation of citizenship is
literally an estoppel upon God and Nature. In other words, acting in Þction negates manÕs religious
freedom by holding a “bar” against the moral, spiritual Laws that govern God’s Creation, for God
sees nor respects no person, regards no Þction (lies), and of course despises mammon. The Þction
of man’s law is only temporary, and not of the Supreme Permanence of Jehovah. So reasonably, a
man acting in Þction simply cannot invoke God to protect his person, for his opponent (govern-
ment) is not of God, but is the calumniator; the Adversary of God and Nature. This is purely a
logical, self-evident conclusion, requiring no religious beliefs at all, but instead only the simplest
understanding of Nature and of contract law: that the principle of contract law is that the contract
makes the law.

The devil is never Þctionally portrayed as being able to control manÕs actions until he tricks man
into signing a contract, re-making man into a debtor bound to hell in exchange for license to have
success within the system of mammon.

The legal process of ÒnaturalizationÓ is another misunderstood legal deprivation of the real mean-
ing of this word natural. Citizenship is not found in Nature, so there really is no such thing as a
ÒnaturalÓ citizen or ÒnaturalÓ person accept in Þction. In fact, nothing could be more unnatural or
unreal as that of a political status, especially one designed with the speciÞc legal intent to defeat
and re-source GodÕs Natural Creation of Life. We must always remember that to have anything in a
political form, including all supposed rights of citizenship, can only ever be an artiÞcial state of
being and opposed to Nature. Every aspect of political existence is a false deceit. A person can only
ever have artiÞcial, political rights. Nothing is God-given under a citizen-ship and in corporate
person-hood. There are no exceptions.

The legal naturalization process is for one and only one purpose — to ethnically impose the will of
a few men upon all other men so that their individual crimes are mutually accountable to all others,
for which we politically call the “public.” More to the point, naturalization is the act of blocking the
scriptural will and testament as God’s Law in order to impose man’s will and legal law over God’s
Word (Son). Man is thus ÒnaturalizedÓ into the legal government as all other ÒnaturalÓ persons,
places, and things are — in name (noun) only. And that’s not a good thing!

Once man claims that his very nature is other than that of God’s own creation, he assumes
subjection to that lesser god and its false law by abandoning Reality, becoming a Þctional character
in some other pretended sovereignty than Jehovah. To be clear, naturalization is merely a total
alienation from God.

!629
 NATURALIZATION - The act of ADOPTING A FOREIGNER and CLOTHING him with
the privileges of NATIVE CITIZENS. (Black4)

NATURALIZE - To confer CITIZENSHIP upon an alien; to make a foreigner the same, in

respect to rights and privileges, AS IF HE WERE A NATIVE CITIZEN OR SUBJECT.
(Black4)

NATURALIZED CITIZEN - One who, BEING AN ALIEN BY BIRTH, has received

CITIZENSHIP UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OR NATION. (Black4)

NATURAL-BORN SUBJECT - In English law, one BORN WITHIN THE DOMINIONS, or

rather WITHIN THE ALLEGIANCE, of the king of England. (Black4)

COLLECTIVE NATURALIZATION - This takes place where a government, by treaty or

cession, ACQUIRES the whole or part of the territory of a foreign nation and TAKES TO
ITSELF THE INHABITANTS THEREOF, clothing them with the rights of CITIZENSHIP
either by the terms of the treaty or by subsequent legislation. (Black4)

NATURAL FOOL - A person born without understanding; a BORN fool or idiot. Sometimes
called, in the old books, a “NATURAL.” (Black4)

—=—
The author wishes to stress the importance of this word fool. The author also wishes to inform all
public persons of any nation that we are all, including myself, acting like complete fools, playing
the part of fools, and thus deserving of the epitaph. For an epitaph is only given for the dead.
Whatever we pretend to know, whatever we profess to have accomplished by our positions,
statuses, and ßattering titles, our foolishness does not leave us in our artiÞcial success. From the
homeless man on the street to the evermore foolish millionaire that beneÞts from the homelessness
and poverty of others without Living in Pure Love and unblemished Charity, we are all playing the
part of the casted fool in a game of Þctional classes. And we have been since our legal birth and
conÞrmation into legal adult-hood (legalized adultery); that age where we consent to our own
corrupted ways and take over voluntarily the franchise of citizenship as consenting Òadults.Ó We
must learn not to take this knowledge, which is not disputable, as merely an insult, but as a self-
evident Truth. It may only offend us if we continue lying to ourselves to justify the bigger lie. We
must Þrst admit our own defeat followed by recognizing our own conceit, and then and only then
may we attempt to defeat the false ßattery of title instead of continuing to embrace it. We must
break free of this cyclic system of foolish behavior and become the men we were Born under God’s
Nature and self-evident Law to Be. But this is voluntary…

The author here asks that the reader take a bit of extra time to read, comprehend, and fully under-
stand the deÞnition of fool below. For it is not only a legal name but a ßattering title. It is not merely
a ßeeting insult, but a lifestyle evidenced by ones legal status in persona (mask). It is a descriptive
causality for all of our collective Reality, for we who dwell only in the public, legal realm in idiocy
and dogged illiteracy without GodÕs Word (Law) and under other menÕs civil laws and temples of
doom (judgement).

FOOLBORN - adjective - Foolish from the BIRTH. (Webs1828)

FOOLERY - noun - 1. The PRACTICE of folly; HABITUAL folly; ATTENTION to trißes. 2.

AN ACT OF FOLLY OR WEAKNESS. 3. OBJECT of folly. (Webs1828)

FOOL - noun - [Hebrew.] 1. One who is destitute of reason, or the common powers of
understanding; an idiot. Some persons are born fools, and are called natural fools; others
may become fools by SOME INJURY DONE to the brain. 2. In common language, a person
who is somewhat deÞcient in intellect, BUT NOT AN IDIOT; or a person who acts
absurdly; ONE WHO DOES NOT EXERCISE HIS REASON; ONE WHO PURSUES A

!630
COURSE CONTRARY TO THE DICTATES OF WISDOM. Experience keeps a dear school,
but fools will learn in no other. 3. In scripture, fool is often used for A WICKED OR
DEPRAVED PERSON; ONE WHO ACTS CONTRARY TO SOUND WISDOM IN HIS
MORAL DEPORTMENT; ONE WHO FOLLOWS HIS OWN INCLINATIONS, WHO
PREFERS TRIFLING AND TEMPORARY PLEASURES TO THE SERVICE OF GOD AND
ETERNAL HAPPINESS. THE FOOL HATH SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD.
Psalms 14:1. 4. A WEAK CHRISTIAN; a godly person who has much remaining sin and
unbelief. O fools, and slow of heart to believe all the prophets have written. Luke 24:25.
Also, one who is accounted or called a fool by ungodly men. 1 Corinthians 4:10. 5. A term of
indignity and reproach. TO BE THOUGHT KNOWING, YOU MUST FIRST PUT THE
FOOL UPON ALL MANKIND. 6. One who counterfeits folly; a buffoon; as a king's fool I
scorn, although their drudge, to be their fool or jester. 1. To PLAY the fool to act the buffoon;
to jest; TO MAKE SPORT. 2. TO ACT LIKE ONE VOID OF UNDERSTANDING. To put the
fool on, TO IMPOSE ON; TO DELUDE. To make a fool of, TO FRUSTRATE; TO DEFEAT;
TO DISAPPOINT. - verb intransitive - To triße; to toy; TO SPEND TIME IN IDLENESS,
SPORT OR MIRTH. Is this a time for fooling? - verb transitive - 1. TO TREAT WITH
CONTEMPT; to disappoint; TO DEFEAT; to frustrate; TO DECEIVE; to impose on. WHEN I
CONSIDER LIFE, 'TIS ALL A CHEAT; FOR FOOLED WITH HOPE, MEN FAVOR THE
DECEIT. 2. To infatuate; to make foolish. 3. TO CHEAT; as, to fool one out of his money. 1.
To fool away, to spend in trißes, idleness, folly, or without advantage; as, to fool away time.
2. TO SPEND FOR THINGS OF NO VALUE OR USE; to expend improvidently; as, to fool
away money… (Webs1828)

JOKER - In political usage, a clause in legislation that is AMBIGUOUS OR APPARENTLY

IMMATERIAL, INSERTED TO RENDER IT INOPERATIVE OR UNCERTAIN without
arousing opposition at the time of passage. (Black4)

FOOLHARDY - adjective - [fool and hardy.] Daring WITHOUT JUDGMENT; madly rash and
ADVENTUROUS; foolishly bold. (Webs1828)

FOOLISH - adjective - 1. VOID OF UNDERSTANDING or sound judgment; WEAK IN

INTELLECT; APPLIED TO GENERAL CHARACTER. 2. Unwise; imprudent; ACTING
WITHOUT JUDGMENT OR DISCRETION IN PARTICULAR THINGS. 3. Proceeding from
folly, or MARKED with folly; silly; vain; trißing. But foolish questions avoid. 2 Timothy 2:23.
4. Ridiculous; despicable. A foolish Þgure he must make. 5. In scripture, WICKED; SINFUL;
ACTING WITHOUT REGARD TO THE DIVINE LAW AND GLORY, OR TO ONE'S OWN
ETERNAL HAPPINESS. O foolish Galatians. Galatians 3:1. 6. Proceeding from depravity;
sinful; as foolish lusts. 1 Timothy 6:9. (Webs1828)

NATURAL LIFE - The period (term) of A PERSON'S EXISTENCE considered as continuing

until terminated by physical DISSOLUTION OR DEATH OCCURRING IN THE COURSE
OF NATURE; used in contradistinction to that JURISTIC AND ARTIFICIAL
CONCEPTION OF LIFE AS AN AGGREGATE OF LEGAL RIGHTS or the POSSESSION
OF A LEGAL PERSONALITY, which could be terminated by “CIVIL DEATH,” that is, that
EXTINCTION OF PERSONALITY which resulted from ENTERING A MONASTERY OR
BEING ATTAINTED of treason or FELONY. (Black4)

NATIONALITY - (repeated) - That quality or CHARACTER which arises from the fact of A
PERSON'S BELONGING TO A NATION OR STATE. Nationality determines the
POLITICAL STATUS OF THE INDIVIDUAL, especially with reference to ALLEGIANCE;
while DOMICILE DETERMINES HIS CIVIL STATUS. Nationality arises either BY BIRTH
OR BY NATURALIZATION. According to Savigny, "nationality" is also used AS OPPOSED
TO "TERRITORIALITY," for the purpose of distinguishing the case of A NATION
HAVING NO NATIONAL TERRITORY; e.g., THE JEWS. (Black4)

—=—

!631
Remember for future reference the fact that to fool anyone else in order to defraud them is to cheat
them. For as we will Þnd, this nation of fools is literally and in every way a land controlled
(governed) by cheaters, organized pirates replete with an incredible propaganda system that
actually causes those cheated to be patriotic about their enemies and quite content in their
servitude to them.

But letÕs not get too far ahead of ourselvesÉ

It is important to note what has been put forward here, so that anyone acting within the agency of
United States citizen-ship (as that which may be summoned) may truly understand his or her
plight. We must know that due to the fact that our political and civil status exist only within the
United States districtÕs jurisdiction, as our domicile and nationality is only in the United States,
these civil rights assigned to us are purely of and under that commercial, national government and
its contracted law. These rights are forced upon us in agency. Therefore we have no protections or
claims to the laws and immunities of private State citizens, as those whose private rights are
reserved from the public law and thus actually and negatively protected under the nature of
constitutional law. We are simply not the People of the individual States, not the creators of the
nation, not the father, and thus have no access to the protective nature of that constitution, for as
domiciled United States citizen-ships we are foreigners in the State for which we temporarily,
commercially re-side. Therefore, since our legal ÒstateÓ is the United States, all actions we take in
the person (property) of the United States are foreign transactions in the individual (several/
private/foreign) States (creators) of that union. And so the public, as legalized (Romanized) United
States citizen-ships (commercial vessels in mammon) are always considered to be acting and
performing in an interstate commerce situation and thus regulated as such under the law mer-
chant, under the international law of nations. We must remember our persons operate and have
artiÞcial life only within a corporation, not in Reality. Our legal existence, in other words, within
each individual state jurisdiction, is purely a political (public) one by foreign agents for commercial
purposes. We are not ÒWe, the PeopleÓ of that constitution. We are not its creators or their professed
and fabled posterity (bloodline) inheritors. We are not its landholders. We are only foreign
commercial entities acting in agency within the United States district and jurisdiction as our
principal, while the state we reside in as a third party to that contractual agency relationship. We
are slaves that appear to be masters. While this fact will be thoroughly explored throughout this
work, we must remember that the best slave is the man (beast) that knows not that he is one.

Each of us have our own nativity scene at our own birthÉ

NATIONALIZACION - In Spanish and Mexican law, nationalization. ÒThe nationalization

of property is an act which denotes that IT HAS BECOME THAT OF THE NATION by
some process of law, whereby PRIVATE individuals or corporations have been for speciÞed
reasons DEPRIVED THEREOF (OF PRIVATE STATUS AND PROPERTY).Ó (Black4)

NATIVUS - Latin. In old English law, a native; speciÞcally, ONE BORN INTO A
CONDITION OF SERVITUDE; a born serf or villein. (Black4)

NATIVA - A niefe or female villein. So called because for the most part BOUND BY
NATIVITY. (Black4)

NATIVITAS - Villenage; that state in which men were BORN SLAVES. (Black4)

NATIVI CONVENTIONARII - Villeins or bondmen by CONTRACT or AGREEMENT.

(Black4)

NATIVI STIPITE - Villeins or bondmen by BIRTH or STOCK. (Black4)

NAIF - L. French. A villein; a born slave; a bondwoman. (Black4)

!632
 VILLAIN - An opprobrious epithet, IMPLYING GREAT MORAL DELINQUENCY, and
equivalent to knave, rascal, or scoundrel. The word is libelous. (Black4)

VILLEIN - A person attached to a manor, who was substantially in the condition of a slave,
who performed the base and servile work upon the manor for the lord, and was, in most
respects, A SUBJECT OF PROPERTY BELONGING TO HIM. (Black4)

VILLENAGE - A servile kind of tenure belonging to lands or tenements, whereby the

TENANT was bound to do all such services as the lord commanded, or were Þt for a villein
to do. (Black4)

VILLEIN IN GROSS - A villein who was annexed to the PERSON of the LORD, and
TRANSFERABLE BY DEED FROM ONE OWNER TO ANOTHER. (Black4)

VILLEIN REGARDANT - A villein annexed to the manor of land; A SERF. (Black4)

NATIVE - A natural-born subject or citizen; A DENIZEN BY BIRTH; ONE WHO OWES

HIS DOMICILE OR CITIZENSHIP TO THE FACT OF HIS BIRTH within the country
referred to. The term may also include one born abroad, if his parents were then citizens of the
country, and not permanently residing in foreign parts. The word Ònatives," as used in Alien
Enemy Act, refers to Person's place of birth, so that a PERSON remains a native of country
of his birth, though he has moved away therefrom. One who was born in Germany and later
became a citizen of France was a "native" of Germany. But a person born in Alsace which at the
time of his birth was part of Germany but which was restored to French sovereignty by the
treaty of Versailles of 1918, was a ÒnativeÓ of France. (Black4)

NATIVITY - noun - 1. BIRTH; the coming into LIFE OR THE WORLD. The feast of Christmas
is observed in memory of Christs nativity. 2. TIME, PLACE AND MANNER OF BIRTH; as, to
calculate one’s nativity. 3. STATE OR PLACE OF BEING PRODUCED. These, in their dark
nativity the deep Shall yield us pregnant with infernal ßame. (Webs1828)

—=—

Natural life? In legalese, this only means an idiotic Þction of law. A natural-born fool.

A Ònatural personÓ in its artiÞciality lives (as a Þctional, civil life) only as long as the man bonded in
surety to it actually Lives in Reality under GodÕs Nature and no longer, for the legal Ònatural
personÓ is merely an apparent commercial Þction (puppet) re-presenting the man as a legal form
with no substance. No such ÒpersonÓ Exists in Nature; and in Reality, no person whatsoever can
Exists in Nature. Person is strictly a legal status, never a Creature and Reality under God in Nature.
ItÕs just a word; a term of art in the legal artiÞce. TechnologyÉ Again, that mirror image
(personiÞcation) cannot exist without the man standing before the mirror, controlling the re-
presentation. Whereas a corporation, as an ÒartiÞcial person,Ó may live as long as it is passed
between said Þctional, Ònatural personsÓ in legal control of that legal corporation (artiÞcial person).
But we shouldn't ever consider or respect this as Real Life, as the scriptures instruct, for the person
cannot exist or function without man inhabiting it and with legal word-magic appearing as it in
commerce and in commercial court, be it a natural or artiÞcial person. Both are Þctions of law. Utter
deceits. We are living in a projected lie, a matrix of words.

Did you know you are bound by nativity? Was this nativity story not also the story of Jesus even as
he rose from its spiritual death? Perhaps the obvious clue that one's ÒnativityÓ is not Reality but
mere legal status is the fact that it can be changed by war and conquest. For nativity is only a
product of de facto military force and/or voluntary commerce, and nothing else. Natural, native,
nationalÉ these terms of art are all in similitude. They are all a state of legal bondage, subjection,
and servitude by birth.

!633
 —=—

“Stone walls do not a prison make, nor iron bars a cage…”




—Richard Lovelace (1618-1658), from ‘To Althea From Prison’

—=—

The legal concept of “physical dissolution” (dis-solution) as the end of nativity is not a cession or
death of any Life in Reality (God’s Creation of Nature), but is merely referential to an end of the
bond of contractual relationship — the civil death of a person reborn into a purely spiritual Life
without artiÞce. It is the abandonment of all technology (art). In other words, the life of a Þctional,
legal “natural person” ends when the man physically dies or quits pretending under contract to be
another manÕs person. But the contract of personhood must also be placed into a state of legal death
and thus dissolution when the actual Life of the man ceases in physical substance. For a puppet
cannot function without the puppet master Ñ the master of the citizen-ship. The contract must be
ended. To be perfectly clear, the man can dissolve the binding nature of that contract and surety
(persona) without actually dying himself. This is a civil death. ItÕs just paper. And citizen-ship is
just a presumption of obligation to a de facto law that needs to be rebutted, corrected, and thus
destroyed before man can ever reclaim his place under GodÕs Nature. His debt must be discharged,
not merely paid, as his contracted performance comes to an end (is executed). We must quit acting
the part of another player.

DISSOLVE - To terminate; abrogate; cancel; annul; disintegrate. To release or unloose the

binding force of anything. As to "dissolve a corporation," to Òdissolve an injunction.Ó See
Dissolution. (Black4)

DISSOLUTION -

IN CONTRACTS - The dissolution of a contract is the cancellation or abrogation of it by

the parties themselves, with the effect of annulling the binding force of the agreement,
and RESTORING EACH PARTY TO HIS ORIGINAL RIGHTS. In this sense it is
frequently used in the phrase "dissolution of a partnership."

IN PRACTICE - The act of rendering a legal proceeding null, abrogating or revoking it;
unloosing its constraining force; as when an injunction is dissolved by the court.

OF CORPORATIONS - The dissolution of a corporation is the termination of its

EXISTENCE as a body politic. This may take place in several ways; as by act of the
legislature, where that is constitutional; by surrender or forfeiture of its charter; by
expiration of its charter by lapse of time; by proceedings for winding it up under the law;
by loss of all its members or their reduction below the statutory limit. De Facto
Dissolution, is that which takes place when (a) corporation, by reason of insolvency or for
other reason, suspends all operations and goes into liquidation.

OF MARRIAGE - The act of terminating a marriage; divorce; BUT THE TERM DOES
NOT INCLUDE ANNULMENT. (Black4)

—=—

A personÕs artiÞcial ÒlifeÓ can only be considered in Þctional, political terms. But this magical word-
term natural references only the term (time) of artiÞcial life that matches exactly that of the Real Life
(time) of the man, whose Real and legal ÒnaturalÓ birth and death matches that of the certiÞed
personÕs length of civil, political, artiÞcial life, from certiÞed Þctional birth to certiÞed Þctional
death.

!634
Bottom line: despite this wonderfully devious word-magic and trickery, the word person should
never be respected in any case as a Creation (Creature) of God and Nature, as anything Real, and
instead always as a contradictory attack upon God and thus man’s Nature. A person is always
artiÞcial. We must never fall prey to these legal terms of art nor respect its always false titles. We
should never be on defense against the Truth, against Nature’s Law and its True Judge (God) by
our legal actions. We must remember that all legal title and authority is attached only to the
Þctional person of the state in surety to the man, but never to the man himself. Man may only make
claim to political and civil rights if he Þrst attaches (bonds) himself to the name of a politically
created persona (legal status) to which those legal rights apply. If it isn’t clear by now, it must be
understood that Þctional law sticks (applies) only to Þctional things, and Natural Law applies only
to Real things. These laws cannot be intermixed and should never be confused, just as the cartoon
(subject) must never be confused with its object.

—=—

“The force of nature is greatest; nature is doubly great.”

NAUTRAE VIS MAXIMA; NATURA BIS MAXIMA. 2 Inst. 564. (Black4)

—=—

“The nature of the contract of suretyship is strictissimi juris, and cannot

endure nor be extended from thing to thing, from person to person, or
from time to time.”
NATURA FIDE JUSSIONIS SIT STRICTISSIMI JURIS ET NON DURA T VEL EXTENDATUR DE RE AD REM, DE PERSONA AD PERSONAM, DE
TEMPORE AD TEMPUS. Burge, Sur. 40. (Black4)

—=—

The contractual relationship of citizenship is, in other words, a non-inheritable suretyship. The
person assigned and conÞrmed by my Self cannot exist after either my Natural death or execution
of that performance debt under contract (person). The person, in this way, is non-transferable. And
this means the children of every public person are pirated out of everything their Natural parents
in persona acquired, for all stuff is property of the person/status (property) of the state.

Understanding that the Laws of Nature are equitable in their application (individually considered
upon each man), we must take serious note that the legal laws of suretyship in contractual person-
hood are opposed to equitableness (Natural Law). In a contractual relationship, the laws are held to
be strict and generally without deviation or consideration to individual circumstances. TrafÞc laws
are a good example of this. The legal law becomes supreme, even when the law is opposed to the
Permanence and Supremacy of Nature and to the best interests of the man bound to it. Whereas
equitableness is consideration of intent and of what is duty, a man in the bond of suretyship to a
person legally lives by a strict set of legal rules and laws governing that and all other persons of the
same status. Within this contract of suretyship, the law itself is not equitable, for it can never be in
error. We may only pray to an administrator (judge) of that law for his false forgiveness. It is to be
obeyed despite the moral beliefs of the man acting in surety, for the contract makes the law, and
this is why the law was broken is in fact irrelevant. Intention is nulliÞed through contract. The law
is strictly attached to the Þctional persona (legal mask) as a rule of use and operation of that person
(vessel), much like a rental car contract.

Remember, we must metaphorically consider these aspects of the Þction from the Þctional eyes and
perspective of the Þctional state and its Þctional agencies. Of course, we do this all the time with
movies, books and other entertainment media, and even through memorization of sports statistics.
But when it comes to our own Þctional stories in persona (mask) as actors of the state, we seem to
fall short in our imaginations. It is much harder to be the victim than to watch it on TV.

!635
 —=—

ÒIn the Þction of law there is always equity; a legal Þction is always
consistent with equity.”
—IN FICTIONE JURIS SEMPER AEQUITAS EXISTIT. (Black4)

—=—

The man (blood) is not considered, for the man is of Nature (verb), and has given up that True
Equitableness of Natural Law and its protections so as to operate solely in commercial suretyship
and within the strict laws binding that state of Þctional being in mammon. He becomes only a
lesser, legally natural (noun), which is the opposite of True Being in the Nature of Jehovah (the
actual verb of Existence).

STRICTISSIMI JURIS - Latin. Of the strictest right or law. "Licenses being matter of
SPECIAL INDULGENCE, the application of them was formerly strictissimi juris.Ó (Black4)

STRICTUM JUS - Latin. Strict right or law; the rigor of the law AS DISTINGUISHED
FROM EQUITY. (Black4)

STRICT - Exact; accurate; precise; UNDEVIATING; GOVERNED OR GOVERNING BY

EXACT RULES. (Black4)

EQUITABLE - Just; conformable to the PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE AND RIGHT. Just, fair,
and right, in consideration of the facts and circumstances of the INDIVIDUAL case.
EXISTING IN EQUITY; available or sustainable ONLY IN EQUITY, or only upon the rules
and principles of equity. (Black4)

EQUITABLE - That which is in conformity to the NATURAL LAW. (Bouv1856)

INDULGENCE, INDULGENCY - noun - FREE PERMISSION to the appetites, humor,

desires, passions or will to act or operate; FORBEARANCE OF RESTRAINT OR
CONTROL. HOW MANY CHILDREN ARE RUINED BY INDULGENCE! INDULGENCE
IS NOT KINDNESS OR TENDERNESS, but it may be the effect of one or the other, or of
negligence. 1. GratiÞcation; as the indulgence of lust or of appetite. 2. FAVOR GRANTED;
LIBERALITY; gratiÞcation. If all these gracious indulgencies are without effect on us, we
must perish in our folly. 3. IN THE ROMISH CHURCH, REMISSION OF THE
PUNISHMENT DUE TO SINS, GRANTED BY THE POPE OR CHURCH, and supposed to
save the sinner from purgatory; ABSOLUTION FROM THE CENSURES OF THE CHURCH
and from all transgressions. (Webs1828)

—=—

Indulgences are declared often by the Pope. But how many priests of the Catholic Church have
been absolved for the indulgence of their appetites into defenseless little children is an occulted
mystery kept apparently under the rose. We should Live with the fear that Jehovah knows no such
concept and thus indulges no such behavior under Its Law and judgement. To be forgiven by the
church is a trißing legal conception by evil men seeking to hide their own indiscretions and
undesirable hunger for the ßesh.

Did I mention the pope is infallible?

Would you expect anything less from an anti-christ?

!636
 —=—

“He (the pope) can pronounce sentences and judgements IN

CONTRADICTION THE RIGHTS OF NATIONS, TO THE LAW OF
GOD AND MAN… HE CAN FREE HIMSELF FROM THE
COMMANDS of the apostles, he being their superior, AND FROM
THE RULES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT… The pope has power to
change times, TO ABROGATE LAWS, AND TO DISPENSE WITH ALL
THINGS, EVEN THE PRECEPTS OF CHRIST.”
—The Roman Decretalia, Decretal, de Translat. Episcop

—=—

“Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto
you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their
conversation. JESUS CHRIST THE SAME YESTERDAY, AND TODAY,
AND FOR EVER. BE NOT CARRIED ABOUT WITH DIVERSE AND
STRANGE DOCTRINES. For it is a good thing that the heart be
established WITH GRACE; not with meats, which have not proÞted
them that have been occupied therein.”


—Hebrews 13:7-9, KJB

—=—

“For I am the LORD (Jehovah), I CHANGE NOT…”

—Malachi 3:6, KJB

—=—

To be clear, the strict nature of legal laws in a contractual relationship have the purpose of dis-
missing many of the principles (maxims) of any equitable law that would otherwise protect man
from the Þctional tyranny of commercial existence. The strictly deÞned terms of the contractual
relationship voids any application of the protective Nature of these scriptural principles of equity
so that the contract supersedes any other law, and speciÞcally those of God, referred to as other-
wise “unalienable rights.” And this is the greatest danger of contracting in the surety-ship of
person-hood under the state. This is the danger of using the signature (surname) of another.

But what is danger and how exactly can government protect us from it? Not ironically, this is very
much like the maÞa model, where the victim needs the aggressors protection, and so pays
handsomely for it against his True will. It is inducement to sin, like paying the bully off to not hurt
you in the public schoolyard. This word danger is one of those terms of the art of law that is totally
opposed to that for which we vulgarly consider it, for danger is in fact a contracted dis-ease of
citizenship. The words state and district literally means “danger.”

Etymologically, the noun danger stems from the mid-13th century, meaning the "POWER OF A
LORD OR MASTER, JURISDICTION," from Anglo-French daunger and Old French dangier,
meaning "POWER, POWER TO HARM, MASTERY, AUTHORITY, CONTROL,” from the 12th

!637
century Modern French danger, an alteration of dongier, from the Vulgar Latin dominarium "power
of a lord," from Latin dominus "LORD, master" (also see DOMAIN). The modern sense of "risk,
peril" (from being in the control of someone or something else) evolved Þrst in French and was
used in English by the late 14th century, replacing the Old English pleoh; in early Middle English
this sense is found in peril.

Simply being a subject of any nation puts us in a contracted state of accepted and consented to
“danger” (jurisdiction, executive authority). Taxes and other exactions and extortions are paid to
the master government for the temporary avoidance of that danger from the exchequer (Treasury
Department and its internal revenue collection agency). This is the false safety in mammon offered
to all citizenships in franchise as an exchange for taxation (protection money). And we all know
what happens when we donÕt pay our protection money in the form of exaction and taxation
(extortion) every year! Hell, if you really think you own the publicly registered home that you pay
property tax upon, then stop paying those extortions (property taxes) and see what happens. YouÕll
be homeless in no time at all! Remember, private citizens pay no tax for being public.

To be put into danger is the very description of the franchise created by this birth registration
process. The citizen-ship is assigned as the commercial ad-venture begins; after that Natural water
is broken by the maternal vessel. We are exposed to the dangers of intercourse, and so our ships
must be insured in chancery and with ourselves being made sureties. With danger comes
protection, and with protection subjection, for the danger only exists from that which protects
against it, maÞa style. Without a citizen-ship, there is no insurable danger. A Free man under
Natural Law assumes all liability and risks all chance alone, without the tyrannical hand of the
state, and without insurance over future exposure to such risk and hazard. He is his own danger
and his own security. By receiving no evil or mark (status) that requires insurance and protection,
no evil may befall a man in that legal, commercial sense. For it is only the assigned commercial
vessel (personhood/citizen-ship) that allows danger (jurisdiction of the land-lordÕs authority) to
civilly overcome him. Without such evil status and title in artiÞce, no artiÞcial evils may effect man
if he makes his election of God his only surety.

DANGER - noun - Peril; risk; hazard; EXPOSURE TO INJURY, LOSS, PAIN OR OTHER
EVIL. Our craft is in danger to be set at nought. Acts 19:27. It is easy to boast of despising
death, when there is no danger. - verb transitive - TO PUT IN HAZARD; TO EXPOSE TO
LOSS OR INJURY. (Webs1828)

EXTRAORDINARY DANGER - In the law of MASTER AND SERVANT, one not ordinarily
incident to the SERVICE. (Black4)

—=—

Here we must stop to consider that it is in governments best interest to cause as much peril, risk,
hazard, and exposures to as many evils as is possible while still pretending and appearing to
remain legitimate (de jure) in the eyes of its victims (citizenships). The more hazard, the more
opportunity for protection, the more insurance premiums and taxes for those protection-money
agencies and their tax-harvesters (farmers of men) to collect. Again, this is not rocket science,
merely a course in Voluntary Servitude 101 with a minor in dog-Latin and legalease. Logic prevails
only when spirituality is its Source. Most of us resign to the false dialectic (logic) of that commercial
system of mammon simply because we have lost all spiritual foundations and considerations that
may defeat the pure and prevailing but false legalistic logic that so entraps us into a spiritual death
of civil life (false existence). It is that our spiritual cause has been sidetracked at birth, that we have
been brought (injured) into this legal system of money (debt), that we cannot ever seem to fulÞll
our spiritual selves. We can never Þnd heaven because we are subjected to hell by our own volition.
For danger is nothing if not an inducement to contract (protection). A legal person obviously has no
will of its own. Its will is bound by the strict law of its use. And so free will only abounds in private
men following GodÕs Law of Nature, or falsely (legally) in those who claim self-appointed
sovereignty (godship) over others in GodÕs empty (without Spirit) name. In this the reader should

!638
have no doubt, for this is the very essence of the ancient wisdom of the scriptures, hidden in plain
sight by those institutions of religion and law that exist only despite that spiritual, scriptural under-
standing, and which can only claim man as its subject through word magic and trickery via
Þctional personhood; a special membership to hellÕs agency. While a man of God is burdened only
by his own choices and duties in and because of his free will, a Þctional person is in actuality the
burden of strict absence of such free will and choice in lieu of the strictly set legal law of persons;
that legalistic, amoral law that controls all actions of artiÞcial state creations in its agency.

VOLITION - noun - [Latin volitio, from volo, to will. See Will.] 1. The act of willing the act of
determining CHOICE, or forming a purpose. There is a great difference between actual
volition and approbation of judgment. Volition is the ACTUAL EXERCISE OF THE POWER
WHICH THE MIND HAS of considering or forbearing to consider an idea. 2. The power of
willing or DETERMINING. (Webs1828)

APPROBATION - noun - [Latin approbatio. See Proof and Prove.] 1. The act of approving; a
liking; that state or DISPOSITION OF THE MIND, in which WE ASSENT TO THE
PROPRIETY OF A THING, with some degree of pleasure or satisfaction; as, THE LAWS OF
GOD REQUIRE OUR APPROBATION. 2. Attestation; support; that is, active approbation or
action in favor of what is approved. 3. The commendation of a book licensed or permitted to
be PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY, as was formerly the case in England. (Webs1828)

—=—

A man of God has volition by the Grace of his only Master, while a citizen-ship has only
approbation to what his master wills and judges by strict law and custom. Volition is the
spirituality of GodÕs gift of Nature, while mere approbation without God is legalism. There is a big
difference between approbation (approving) and probation (actually proving):

PROBATION - noun - [Latin probatio.] The act of proving; proof. 1. TRIAL; examination; ANY
PROCEEDING DESIGNED TO ASCERTAIN TRUTH; in universities, the examination of a
student, as to his qualiÞcations for a degree. 2. In a monastic sense, trial or the year of
novitiate, which a person must pass in a convent, to prove his virtue and his ability to bear
the severities of the rule. 3. MORAL TRIAL; THE STATE OF MAN IN THE PRESENT LIFE,
IN WHICH HE HAS THE OPPORTUNITY OF PROVING HIS CHARACTER AND BEING
QUALIFIED FOR A HAPPIER STATE. PROBATION WILL END WITH THE PRESENT
LIFE. 4. In America, the trial of a clergyman's qualiÞcations as a minister of the gospel,
preparatory to his settlement. We say, a man is preaching on probation. 5. In general, TRIAL
FOR PROOF, or satisfactory evidence, or the time of trial. (Webs1828)

—=—

Citizen-ships are essentially on probation, being placed into a life-long trial called legally as freedom
and liberty, which is merely the legal right of the denizens of a legal debtorÕs hell to act in the
franchise of commerce within strict borders, laws, and customs. But the trial is not to ascertain
some level of Þnancial success in that Þction of mammon, but a test of character in overcoming that
addiction in mammon. The wealthy goyim in public citizen-ship is a most miserable failure, having
succumb to the very essence of the antichrist spirit, law, and false persona. For this is a trail to
prove oneÕs True Nature of Self, not how successful one can be in false persona (behind a mask) in
licensed sin (syn). Here the words prove and overcome are a terms of Nature, carrying the notion of
True action and works, and are not merely a legal proof of empty words. And one either mentally,
physically, and spiritually overcomes or one approbates (enters mentally a state of approval) to the
artiÞce and becomes hopelessly intertwined with the false persona and id-entity of the strawman,
getting utterly lost in the matrix of legal life. This is legal approbation (approval) to mammon. Only
men of God are born again, as probation ends with the present (artiÞce of legal) life. All others falling in
between these states of being go to jail or are conquered militarily, killed off, impoverished, or
made refugee.

!639
And so we attempt to appear in court (in person) as private men, which is as silly a concept as
crawling into the television to appear in a cartoon as a man, without being rendered as a cartoon
(legal) person. Man (Reality) has no place in any legal jurisdiction (Þctional place).

Those that wish to escape this system seem to forget that their accident of birth prevents them from
escaping until that event of the birth record information and registration (tax) is corrected and
overcome as the discharge of a contract of performance. Soldiers, for instance, get either an
honorable or dishonorable discharge from their “service” (performance) contract with the military
once that contractual term (life) is executed. Most problems in court are the result of public persons
attempting to act in a private capacity while still claiming to be (appear as) public property in
persona. The fool will still attempt to use the proprietary credit and beneÞts of that debtor system
and franchise of mammon as if it is a God-given Right, committing civil actions in that sin (syn) of
artiÞce and personhood (legal status) while remaining clueless about how to obtain such a spiritual
(private) Life under God utilizing only the actual “negative” protections of God’s Nature and
Laws. The second we claim the protective legal surname as that which is attached to our christian
name in false security, the legal franchise of commercial citizenship is invoked, and God’s Nature is
rendered absentee at bar. The trial is ongoing, the probation permanent until overcome. For we
may only Exist and serve under one God (Sovereign). We may choose to worship the Sovereign
Nature of Jehovah as God or we may continue in approbation to worship the words and contracts
of a corporation calling itself as a god (legal sovereignty), knowing that all the gods of the nations are
idols.

Most in the “alternative,” “patriot,” and “truth” movement get lost in their original ideals and
intent, never Þnding the need to prove themselves to God and instead seeking the false promise of
retribution in mammon. We are lead away from True knowledge of scripture at every turn, seeking
remedy and reward in a form that can only ever be debt (as money) and thus property of some
government corporation. Retribution is the reward for approbation to the legal system and law, for
believing in (loving) its delusion more than the Reality of Nature and Its Law, and for acceptance
and consent to that Þctional existence in persona. This is a miserable failure, an attainment of mental
conditioning and spiritual death that is the opposite of the end goal of such a probation. Instead of
proving one’s worthiness to Be Free under God’s Law in Nature by adhering only to Its Highest
Law in abandonment of what Þctional legal id-entity Caesar has rendered, one instead accepts a
state of retribution while remaining voluntarily ensnared in and addicted to the legal matrix,
whether one Þnds himself under the illusion of wealth in the legal paradise of mammon or in the
harsh Reality of legalized poverty and squaller.

RETRIBUTION - noun - 1. Repayment; RETURN accommodated to the action; REWARD;

COMPENSATION. In good ofÞces and due retributions, we may not be pinching and
niggardly. 2. A GRATUITY OR PRESENT GIVEN FOR SERVICES IN THE PLACE OF A
SALARY. 3. THE DISTRIBUTION OF REWARDS and punishments at the general
judgment. It is a strong argument for a state of retribution hereafter, that in this world
VIRTUOUS PERSONS ARE VERY OFTEN UNFORTUNATE, AND VICIOUS PERSONS
PROSPEROUS. (Webs1828)

RE - A preÞx or inseparable particle in the composition of words, denotes return, repetition,

iteration. (Webs1828)

TRIBUTE - noun - [Latin tributum, from tribuo, to give, bestow or divide.] 1. An annual or
stated sum of money OR OTHER VALUABLE THING, PAID BY ONE PRINCE OR
NATION TO ANOTHER, EITHER AS AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SUBMISSION, OR
AS THE PRICE OF PEACE AND PROTECTION, OR BY VIRTUE OF SOME TREATY. The
Romans made all their conquered countries pay tribute as do the Turks at this day; AND IN
SOME COUNTRIES THE TRIBUTE IS PAID IN CHILDREN. 2. A personal contribution; as
a tribute of respect. 3. Something given or contributed. (Webs1828)




!640
 TRIBULATION - noun - [Latin tribulo, to thrash, to beat.] Severe afßiction; DISTRESSES of
life; vexations. In Scripture, it often denotes the troubles and distresses WHICH PROCEED
FROM PERSECUTION. When tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, he is
offended. Matthew 13:21. In the world ye shall have tribulation. John 16:33. (Webs1828)

TRIBUTARY - adjective - [from tribute.] PAYING TRIBUTE TO ANOTHER, either from

compulsion, as an ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SUBMISSION, OR TO SECURE
PROTECTION, or for the purpose of PURCHASING PEACE. The republic of Ragusa is
tributary to the grand seignor. Many of the powers of Europe are tributary to the Barbary
states. 1. SUBJECT; SUBORDINATE. He, to grace his tributary gods— 2. Paid in tribute. No
ßatt'ry tunes these tributary lays. 3. Yielding supplies of any thing. The Ohio has many large
tributary streams; and is itself tributary to the Mississippi. - noun - ONE THAT PAYS
TRIBUTE OR A STATED SUM TO A CONQUERING POWER, FOR THE PURPOSE OF
SECURING PEACE AND PROTECTION, OR AS AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF
SUBMISSION, OR FOR THE PURCHASE OF SECURITY. What a reproach to nations that
they should be the tributaries of Algiers! (Webs1828)

—=—

Let’s stop and consider here… which conquered (purchased) people of which countries pay tribute
to the nation for the price of Òpeace and protectionÓ and as an acknowledged submissive act, and
does so by delivering their children over to the nation as a personal (in person) contribution? And
so we must ask ourselves, is not public citizenship merely a state of tribulation, paying tribute to
purchase protection, security, and peace, just like a prisoner awaits his release from probation?

What was it that Ambrose Pierce so slyly deÞned in his rather strangely titled but rather honest
dictionary?

ALIEN - (repeated) - noun - AN AMERICAN SOVEREIGN IN HIS PROBATIONARY STATE.

(The Devil’s Dictionary, by Ambrose Pierce, 1911)

—=—

Of course all US citizen-ships are tributary (taxpaying) aliens on probation in any private (foreign)
State they temporarily reside in, with only the several (private) States (People) being the legal
sovereignty receiving that tribute (tax). This makes the private ÒPeopleÓ as the ultimate beneÞciary
of the Òretributer" (taxpayer/tributary), just as the rancher beneÞts from milking his cattle. His
cattle are peopled (stocked) upon his private ranch land and fenced in.

And so here we have another crude but clear conÞrmation of just what a common 14th amendment
US citizen (denizenship) is: a non-inheritable, contractual relationship of lower-class status in the
time domain (a dead, civil life contractual relationship) representing a probation period granted as
a legal franchise (freedom) and commercial vessel (person) in debtorÕs hell while remaining one of
the reprobate (those abandoned to sin). Yet this prison for debtors to mammon is set up with the
chance of probation for good behavior through the unwavering adherence to only the foundational
Law of God, which admonishes respect and (demonic) possession of persons, ßattering titles,
numbers, and marks of any kind.

The United States, as all other nations, is a holding company for the goyim, for the reprobate soul:

REPROBATE - adjective - [Latin reprobatus, reprobo, to disallow; re and probo, to prove.] 1. NOT
ENDURING PROOF OR TRIAL; NOT OF STANDARD PURITY OR FINENESS;
DISALLOWED; REJECTED. Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath
rejected them. Jeremiah 6:30. 2. Abandoned in sin; lost to virtue or grace. THEY PROFESS
THAT THEY KNOW GOD, BUT IN WORKS DENY HIM, BEING ABOMINABLE AND
DISOBEDIENT, AND TO EVERY GOOD WORK REPROBATE. Titus 1:16. 3. Abandoned to

!641
 error, or in apostasy. 2 Timothy 3:8. - noun - A PERSON ABANDONED TO SIN; ONE LOST
TO VIRTUE AND RELIGION. I acknowledge myself a reprobate a villain, a traitor to the
king. - verb transitive - 1. To disapprove with detestation or marks of extreme dislike; to
disallow; to reject. It expresses more than disapprove or disallow. We disapprove of slight
faults and improprieties; WE REPROBATE WHAT IS MEAN OR CRIMINAL. 2. In a milder
sense, to disallow. Such an answer as this, is reprobated and disallowed of in law. 3. To
abandon to wickedness and eternal destruction. 4. TO ABANDON TO HIS SENTENCE,
WITHOUT HOPE OF PARDON. Drive him out to reprobated exile. (Webs1828)

—=—

But do not be fooled, for those private citizens of the States (People) are only in retribution legally,
not spiritually. They are not men of God, but men in corporate corruption and piracy. They are not
the followers of christ, and instead built this legal matrix of nations and false doctrines to ensnare
and entrap all men from their inception into God’s Kingdom. They are not the good guys. They are
not heroes. They are not following christ’s teachings in any way. They are nothing if not the
personiÞcation of the devil watching over their own created hell for debtors. They are the artiÞcers,
the false gods, creators and patenters of all Þctional inventions.

All legal systems are merely organized, legalized (permitted) crime. They literally can be nothing
else in the Þgurative eyes of Jehovah (Nature). They are merely incorporated combinations of men
in conspiracy to injure (bring under their own false law) and thus legally harm and extort from all
others through a Þctional system created in a occult societal Order with the design to elevate and
beneÞt the few in magistracy at the expense of the multitude. This is not GodÕs way, and it is
certainly not on par with christ’s path or Law. They have twisted and misused the scriptural
teachings in purposeful error and cursing its intent, using their own false interpretations and
recreated doctrines (laws) to forcibly justify their lying existence in the stead of (anti-) God’s Word
(Son). These are only systems of executive enforcement by land-lords (gods) over various forms
(denominations) of feudalism. It has seemingly always been this way, and today’s multitude of the
nations are what remains of that very old and modiÞed legal system that drives men into this state
of reprobation — a condemnatory sentence as the rejection of the acknowledgement of blood-right.
The names change as do the deÞning words and languages, but the concepts from that tree of
knowledge of good and evil in artiÞce remain. And so the self-appointed sovereign power will
always offer its “protection” from “danger” to those willing to “dwell” in submission and
conformity against Nature’s Law and God in approbation (approval) of the sovereign’s will and
binding contract to its corporate, legal matrix code. We, as the willing denizens of this debtor’s hell,
must therefore accept sin as a way of life and embrace lies as the conÞrmed truth. And through this
corporate system, legal names and titles are recreated from the informed vital qualities as the
statistics of a Life that will never be Lived as it was destined.

We are the enemy of our own Selves, for we personify what is adversarial (satanic) to our True
Nature. We chose reprobation and never Þnd redemption.

REDEMPTION - noun - [Latin redemptio. See Redeem.] 1. Repurchase of captured goods or

prisoners; the act of procuring the deliverance of persons or things from the possession and
power of captors by the payment of an equivalent; ransom; RELEASE; as the redemption of
prisoners taken in war; the redemption of a ship and cargo. 2. DELIVERANCE FROM
BONDAGE, DISTRESS, OR FROM LIABILITY TO ANY EVIL OR FORFEITURE, EITHER
BY MONEY, LABOR OR OTHER MEANS. 3. Repurchase, as of lands alienated. Leviticus
25:24. Jeremiah 32:7. 4. THE LIBERATION OF AN ESTATE FROM A MORTGAGE; or the
purchase of the right to re-enter upon it by paying the principal sum for which it was
mortgaged with interest and cost; also, the right of redeeming and re-entering. 5. Repurchase
of notes, bills or other EVIDENCE OF DEBT by paying their value in specie to their
holders. 6. In theology, THE PURCHASE OF GOD'S FAVOR BY THE DEATH AND
SUFFERINGS OF CHRIST; THE RANSOM OR DELIVERANCE OF SINNERS FROM THE
BONDAGE OF SIN AND THE PENALTIES OF GOD'S VIOLATED LAW BY THE

!642
 ATONEMENT OF CHRIST. IN WHOM WE HAVE REDEMPTION THROUGH HIS
BLOOD. Ephesians 1:7. Colossians 1:14. (Webs1828)

—=—

Have you noticed that all of these legal terms are straight out of the Bible? From being redeemed,
Þnding retribution or remedy, being reprobate and Þnding probation, and of course the notion of
tribulation so misunderstood by the corporate Christian that knows not his place as a tributary of
such evils in the artiÞce of church and state. This sort of legal (dead) simulation of the story of the
Law (christ) has been recreated into the legal system, and ultimately we Þnd it to be a simulacra
Ñ a copy without an original Ñ for there is no redemption without the blood of christ. The legal
matrix is outside of and detached from God’s Nature, and so even as a simulation it has no
semblance to its proclaimed Source of authority and false legal existence, which is of course God.
Yet God respects no such artiÞce, no such titles, no such borders of nations, and certainly no such
Þctional personas as those imposter ÒfathersÓ that built this nation with word-magic alone.

Ultimately, the entire structure built by these fathers (gods) of controlled chaos in the legal realm is
to prevent us from yet another stolen and legalized term, to cause men to worship Þctional gods as
their landlords and saviors:

SALVATION - noun - [Latin salvo, TO SAVE.] 1. The ACT of saving; PRESERVATION from
destruction, DANGER or great calamity. 2. Appropriately in theology, THE REDEMPTION
OF MAN FROM THE BONDAGE OF SIN AND LIABILITY TO ETERNAL DEATH, and
the conferring on him everlasting happiness. This is the great salvation, Godly sorrow
worketh repentance to salvation. 2 Corinthians 7:10. 3. DELIVERANCE FROM ENEMIES;
VICTORY. Exodus 14:13. 4. REMISSION OF SINS, OR SAVING GRACES. Luke 19:9. 5. The
author of man's salvation. Psalms 27:1. 6. A term of praise or benediction. Revelation 19:1.
(Webs1828)

—=—

How can man be saved from his enemy when he is unwittingly patriotic towards it? In the legal
realm we really only have two possibilities of status (persona), which is master or servant. The
masters are in retribution by their legal tributary of subjects suffering from their voluntary
approbation in agency. It is a system of master (receiver of tributes) vs. subject (prisoners on
probation to become either masters or, in abandonment of the Þction towards spiritual salvation,
men of God). For citizenship is indeed a bondage to sin (synthetic things) and a liability to spiritual
death in legal personhood.

Please, whatever you do, do not confuse True Salvation in Jehovah (the Þgurative blood of christ)
with what is acted out in false show within the evangelistic corporations and their employed (used)
false preachers (teachers) in mammon. For the church and state are one and the same, two parts of
the same artiÞcial person of government, corporate entities with the same father of lies.

Here again we see the simulation of former caste systems, that insurable chance of hazard called
interstate commerce being as just another artiÞcial space on the monopoly board. Of course, all
ships must be ensured on their ad-ventures on behalf of the state, for the ship (status) is state
property as are the rights bestowed upon the status (person) in its commercial venture. One does
not rent a car or other vessel without guaranteeing (insuring) its safe return, its voyage home to
dock after ad-venture. So remember, to lay (lie) is deÞned as to wage a chance of hazard, where
one's lot is staked. ItÕs all about business, a Life-like game of monopoly played by actors in agency,
as the game of artiÞcial life in the AI.

ALEATORY - Depending upon an EVENT the outcome of which is unknown; resting upon
a contingency. Applied, mainly, to annuities and insurance contracts. It is of the essence of
all aleatory contracts that there should be RISK on one side or on both sides. (WCA1889)

!643
HAZARD - noun - [Latin casus, A FALL, and ard, the common termination.] 1. CHANCE;
accident; casualty; a fortuitous EVENT; that which falls or comes suddenly or unexpectedly,
the cause of which is unknown, or whose operation is unforeseen or unexpected. I will stand
the hazard of the die. 2. DANGER; peril; RISK. He encountered the enemy at the hazard of
his reputation and life. Men are led on from one stage of life to another, in a condition of the
utmost hazard. 3. A GAME AT DICE. To run the hazard to risk; to take the chance; to do or
neglect to do something, when the consequences are not foreseen, and not within the powers
of calculation. - verb transitive - To expose to chance; to put in danger of loss or injury; to
venture; to risk; as, to hazard life to save a friend; to hazard an estate on the throw of a dice;
TO HAZARD SALVATION FOR TEMPORAL PLEASURE. Men hazard nothing by a course
of evangelical obedience. 1. To venture to incur, or bring on; as, to hazard the loss or
reputation. - verb intransitive - TO TRY THE CHANCE; TO ADVENTURE; TO RUN THE
RISK OR DANGER. Pause a day or two, before you hazard— (Webs1828)

ACCIDENCE - noun - [See Accident.] A small book containing the rudiments of

GRAMMAR. (Webs1828)

ACCEDE - verb intransitive - [Latin accedo, of ad and cedo, to yield or give place, or rather to
move.] 1. To agree or assent, as to a proposition, or TO TERMS PROPOSED BY ANOTHER.
Hence in a negotiation. 2. TO BECOME A PARTY, BY AGREEING TO THE TERMS of a
treaty or convention. (Webs1828)

ACCITE - verb transitive - [Latin ad and cito, to cite.] To call; to cite; TO SUMMON. [Not
used.] (Webs1828)

ACCEDING - participle present tense - Agreeing; assenting: BECOMING A PARTY to a treaty

by agreeing to the terms proposed. (Webs1828)

ACCIDENT - The word "accident" is derived from the Latin verb "accidere" signifying "fall
upon, befall, happen, CHANCE." In an etymological sense anything that happens may be said
to be an accident and in this sense, the word has been deÞned as befalling; a change; a
happening; an incident; an occurrence OR EVENT. In its most commonly accepted meaning,
or in its ordinary or popular sense, the word may be deÞned as meaning a fortuitous
circumstance, EVENT, or happening, AN EVENT HAPPENING WITHOUT ANY HUMAN
AGENCY, OR IF HAPPENING WHOLLY OR PARTLY THROUGH HUMAN AGENCY, an
event which under the circumstances is unusual and unexpected by the person to whom it
happens; an unusual, fortuitous, unexpected, unforeseen or unlooked for event, happening
or occurrence; an unusual or unexpected result attending the operation or performance of a
usual or necessary act or event; chance or contingency; fortune; mishap; some sudden and
unexpected event taking place without expectation, upon the instant, RATHER THAN
SOMETHING WHICH CONTINUES, PROGRESSES OR DEVELOPS; something
happening by chance; something unforeseen, unexpected, unusual, extraordinary or
phenomenal, taking place NOT ACCORDING TO THE USUAL COURSE OF THINGS OR
EVENTS, out of the range of ordinary calculations; THAT WHICH EXISTS OR OCCURS
ABNORMALLY, or an uncommon occurrence; the word may be employed as denoting a
calamity, casualty, catastrophe, disaster, an undesirable or unfortunate happening; any
unexpected personal injury resulting from any unlooked for mishap or occurrence; any
unpleasant or unfortunate occurrence, that causes injury, loss, suffering or death; some
untoward occurrence aside from the usual course of events. WITHOUT KNOWN OR
ASSIGNABLE CAUSE. In its proper use the term excludes negligence; that is, an accident is
an event which occurs without the fault, carelessness, or want of proper circumspection of the
person affected, or which could not have been avoided by the use of that kind and degree of
care necessary to the exigency and in the circumstances in which he was placed. Essential
requirement being that happening be one to which human fault does not contribute;
happening of an event without any human agency. It has been said, moreover, that the word 




!644
 "accident" does not have a settled legal signiÞcation; and that in its ordinary meaning it does
not negative the idea of negligence on the part of the person whose physical act caused the
occurrence. Not merely inevitable causalty or the act of providence, or what is technically
called vis major, or irresistible force. See ACT OF GOD. (Black4)

—=—

As hard as it is to ponder, the birth ÒeventÓ as certiÞed and sealed is an accident, a chance happen-
ing in the danger (jurisdiction), meaning that the district happened to Þnd a treasure (pirate booty),
a child (issue) abandoned (delivered) with unknown (undeclared) parentage.

While this may not seem relevant, we must understand that to the bloodline powers that be,
heraldry or the right to bear family Arms is everything. And so for the bloodline there are no
accidents of birth. Each issue is registered as part of a fabled genealogy that causes each descendent
to be considered in law automatically as an heir to the inheritance of the family born into. While
most common men acting in the publicity of national citizen-ships (dead, commercial vessels) have
lost all sense of what it means to bear their own Arms in heraldry, those who have been made into
the goyim of the nations, all births are considered thereof to be as accidental, unplanned, and
illegitimate. For the intent of the issue is not recorded or respected with regard to blood and
inheritance (heirship). Quite the opposite… the accident is always a corruption of blood, and thus
not suitable (having no capacity) for heirship.

Here again I would ask that the reader not shoot the messenger, for we are only seeking the Truth
about this Þction. Sometimes that means we must view the world through the eyes of the evil
bastards who recreated it as simulation in legal Þction and fabled genealogies, the parabolic his-
story of the bloodlines. I will continue to state that the blood of christ is all that actually matters and
that yes, this is all a fable told by those born into false magistracy and sovereignty in Order to
retain their family holdings. Do not mistake the intent of this work as justiÞcation for any of this
legalistic crap!

ACCIDENT - An unforeseeable and unexpected turn of EVENTS THAT CAUSES LOSS IN

VALUE, injury, and increased liabilities. THE EVENT IS NOT DELIBERATELY CAUSED
AND IS NOT INEVITABLE. Refer to INCIDENT. (Black2)

ACCIDENT - noun - [Latin accidens, FALLING, from ad and cado, TO FALL. See Case and
Cadence. Class Gd.] 1. A coming or falling; an event that takes place without one's foresight
or expectation; an event which proceeds from an UNKNOWN CAUSE, or is an UNUSUAL
EFFECT OF A KNOWN CAUSE, and therefore not expected; chance; casualty; contingency.
2. That which takes place or BEGINS TO EXIST without an efÞcient intelligent cause and
without design. All of them, in his opinion, owe their being, to fate, accident or the blind
action of stupid matter. 3. In logic, A PROPERTY, or QUALITY OF A BEING WHICH IS
NOT ESSENTIAL TO IT, as whiteness in paper. Also ALL QUALITIES ARE CALLED
ACCIDENTS, IN OPPOSITION TO SUBSTANCE, as sweetness, softness, and things not
essential to a body, as clothes. 4. In grammar, SOMETHING BELONGING TO A WORD,
BUT NOT ESSENTIAL TO IT, as gender, number, inßection. 5. IN HERALDRY, A POINT
OR MARK, NOT ESSENTIAL TO A COAT OF ARMS. (Webs1828)

INCIDENT - adjective - Falling; casual; fortuitous; coming or happening occasionally, or NOT

IN THE USUAL COURSE OF THINGS, or not according to expectation or in connection
with the main design. As the ordinary course of common affairs is disposed of by general
laws, so man's rarer incident necessities and utilities should be with special equity considered.
A proposition introduced by who, which, whose, whom, etc. is called an incident proposition;
as, Julius, whose surname was Caesar, overcame Pompey. 1. Happening; apt to happen; as
intemperate passions incident to human nature; diseases incident to a climate; misfortunes
incident to the poor. 2. APPERTAINING TO OR FOLLOWING THE CHIEF OR
PRINCIPAL. A court baron is incident to a manor. - noun - THAT WHICH FALLS OUT; AN

!645
EVENT; casualty. 1. THAT WHICH HAPPENS ASIDE OF THE MAIN DESIGN; an episode
or subordinate action. No person, no incident in a play but must be of use to carry on the main
design. (Webs1828)

INCIDENT - This word, used as a noun, denotes anything which inseparably belongs to, or
is connected with, or inherent in, ANOTHER THING, called the "PRINCIPAL." In this
sense, a court-baron is incident to a manor. Also, less strictly, it denotes anything which is
usually connected with another, or connected for some purposes, THOUGH NOT
INSEPARABLY. Thus, THE RIGHT OF ALIENATION IS INCIDENT TO AN ESTATE IN
FEE-SIMPLE, THOUGH SEPARABLE IN EQUITY. (Black2)

INCIDENT AND APPURTENANT - A term that describes the things that happen WHEN
PROPERTY OR LAND IS TRANSFERRED. (Black2)

APPURTENANT - Belonging to; accessory or incident to; adjunct, appended, or annexed to;
answering to accessorium in the civil law. A thing is deemed to be incidental or appurtenant to
land when it is by right used with the land for its beneÞt, as in the case of a way, or water-
course, or of a passage for light, air, or heat from or across the land of another. (Black2)

ACCESSORY - Property. Everything which IS JOINED to another thing, as an ornament, or

to render it more perfect, is an accessory, AND BELONGS TO THE PRINCIPAL THING.
For example, the halter of a horse, the frame of a picture, the keys of a house, and the like; but
a bequest of a house would not carry the furniture in it, as accessory to it. Accesiorium non ducit,
sed sequitur principale. Vide Accession; Adjunction; Appendant; Appurtenances; Appurtenant;
Incident. (Black2)

ACCESSORY CONTRACT - One made for ASSURING THE PERFORMANCE of a prior

contract, either by the same parties, or by others; such as SURETYSHIP, MORTGAGES,
AND PLEDGES. 2. It is a general rule, that PAYMENT OF THE DEBT DUE, OR THE
PERFORMANCE OF A THING REQUIRED TO BE PERFORMED BY THE FIRST OR
PRINCIPAL CONTRACT, IS A FULL DISCHARGE of such accessory obligation. 3. An
accessory agreement to guaranty an original contract, which is void, has no binding effect.
(Black2)

CASE - noun - 1. A covering, box or sheath; that which incloses or contains; as a case for
knives; a case for books; a watch case; a printers case; a pillow case. 2. The outer part of a
building. 3. A certain quantity; as a case of crown glass. 4. A building unfurnished. - verb
transitive - 1. To cover with a case; TO SURROUND WITH ANY MATERIAL THAT SHALL
INCLOSE OR DEFEND. 2. To put in a case or box. 3. To strip off a case covering, or the skin. -
noun - Literally, THAT WHICH FALLS, comes, or happens; AN EVENT. Hence, THE
PARTICULAR STATE, CONDITION, OR CIRCUMSTANCES THAT BEFALL A PERSON,
OR IN WHICH HE IS PLACED; as, make the case your own; this is the case with my friend;
this is his present case. 2. The state of the body, with respect to health or disease; as a case of
fever; he is in a consumptive case; his case is desperate. To be in good case is to be fat, and this
phrase is customarily abridged, to be in case; applied to BEASTS, but not to men, except in a
sense rather ludicrous. 3. A question; a state of facts involving a question for discussion or
decision; as, THE LAWYER STATED THE CASE. 4. A CAUSE OR SUIT IN COURT; as, the
case was tried at the last term. In this sense, case is nearly synonymous with CAUSE, whose
primary sense is nearly the same. 5. In grammar, the inßection of nouns, or a change of
termination, TO EXPRESS A DIFFERENCE OF RELATION IN THE WORD TO OTHERS,
OR TO THE THING REPRESENTED. The variation of nouns and adjectives is called
declension; both case and declension signifying, FALLING OR LEANING FROM THE
FIRST STATE OF THE WORD. Thus, liber is a book; libri, of a book; libro, to a book. In other
words, case denotes a variation in the termination of a noun, TO SHOW HOW THE NOUN
ACTS UPON THE VERB WITH WHICH IT IS CONNECTED, OR IS ACTED UPON BY IT,
OR BY AN AGENT. The cases, except the nominative, are called oblique cases. In case is a

!646
 phrase denoting CONDITION or supposition; literally, IN THE EVENT OR
CONTINGENCY; if it should so fall out or happen. Put the case, suppose the event, or a
certain state of things. Action on the case in law, is an action in which the whole cause of
complaint is set out in the writ. - verb intransitive - To put cases. (Webs1828)

CAUSE - noun - s as z. 1. A suit or action in court; any legal process which a party institutes
to obtain his demand, or by which he seeks his right or his supposed right. This is a legal,
scriptural and popular use of the word, coinciding nearly with case from cado, and action from
ago, to urge or drive. The cause of both parties shall come before the judges. Exodus 22:5. 2.
That which produces an effect; THAT WHICH IMPELS INTO EXISTENCE, OR BY ITS
AGENCY OR OPERATION PRODUCES WHAT DID NOT BEFORE EXIST; that by virtue
of which any thing is done; THAT FROM WHICH ANY THING PROCEEDS, AND
WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD NOT EXIST. Cause is a SUBSTANCE exerting its power
into ACT, TO MAKE A THING BEGIN TO BE. 3. The reason or motive that urges, moves, or
impels the mind to act or decide. For this cause have I raised up Pharaoh. Exodus 9:16. And
David said, is there not a cause? 1 Samuel 17:29. 4. Sake; account. I did it not for his cause that
had done the wrong. 2 Corinthians 6:1. [See Sake.] 5. THAT WHICH A PARTY OR NATION
PURSUES; or rather pursuit, PROSECUTION OF AN OBJECT. We say, Bible Societies are
engaged in a noble cause. [See the Þrst deÞnition.] Hence the word cause is used to denote that
which a person or thing favors; that to which the efforts of an intelligent being are directed;
as, to promote religion is to advance the cause of God. So we say, the cause of truth or of
justice. In all its applications, cause retains something of its original meaning, struggle,
impelling force, contest, effort to obtain or to effect something. 6. Without cause without
good reason; without a reason or motive to justify the act. They hate me without cause.
Psalms 35:19. Psalms 69:4. - verb transitive - 1. TO PRODUCE; TO BRING INTO EXISTENCE.
They caused great joy to all the brethren. Acts 15:3. 2. TO EFFECT BY AGENCY, POWER OR
INFLUENCE. I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days. Genesis 7:4. I will cause him to fall
by the sword. 2 Kings 19:7. - verb intransitive - To assign insufÞcient cause. (Webs1828)

—=—

Note that Webster states above that alienation is a right! This is so important to under-stand, for
voluntary slavery is thus a right, as are any crimes against man and Nature (God) made incident to
citizenship and other contracts created by these legal gods. And so yes in-deed, exaction (extortion)
when legalized (made lawful) is certainly your equal right! For equality, as an equal right for all
citizenships, is merely the legalese way of saying that all slaves are equally punishable under law.

The initial fall of man is that which happens at the birth event (accident/chance), where
abandonment (de-livery) takes place and where cause is created. No case exists until cause is
established. But more importantly, no legal cause exists unless a legal person (status) is created, for
no legal case can exist without the artiÞcial existence of a party in law as its cause. A person can only
be an accessory to the court system if he accedes to the principal of that system by accepting its
legal status in persona and therefore that principal’s artful foundations (principles) of legal (anti-
God) law. And this is the story of the Bible foretold, as an interwinding pathology of the prophetic
tales and potentialities regarding the eventual fall of each man into this Þctional state of being,
which in the end necessarily ends with standing either with or opposed to God’s Law and Nature.

—=—

“An accident of birth had made him a citizen of the United States—his
father having owned a ranch which LAY north instead of south of the
Rio Grande.”
—Rex Ellingwood Beach, ‘Heart of the Sunset,’ chapter 9, 1915

—=—

!647
The notion of an accident of birth is referential only to the goyim, those citizenships born generally
of the nation in adulterous bastardy. Only public persons have accidents of births. For only public
persons have no design or reason for giving birth, as we have no inheritable things to pass on to
our kin. Our blood is already corrupted by our own legal origin of birth and de-livery. For the
public slave, no purpose is served in procreation because no blood may be passed, no heir can be
born, and so no Natural Design can be followed. No family tree need be Þlled in, for nothing will
befall that new branch from the previous root. The bloodline is severed. This is to say that there is
no purpose in law to claim paternity for the typical public person and subject in citizenship to the
United States, for the child’s only value is seen as purely commercial, as in its future human
trafÞcking and labor potential. A child born without heirship is a worthless (without land) bastard
to be exploited only for its human qualities in capitalism. Only private persons have cause to give
birth in a non-accidental way, serving the design and purpose of the inheritable blood-right in
landed estate.

—=—

“A Nation... is a group of persons UNITED BY A COMMON ERROR

ABOUT THEIR ANCESTRY and a common dislike of their neighbors.”
—Karl Deutsch, Nationality and Its Alternatives, 1969, extracted from Shlomo Sand’s “The Invention of the Jewish People,” (English) 2009

—=—

And this is the importance of the naming and recording process by those vampiric heirs and
tyrants of blood. They have established us, the common people in blood corruption, as their chattel
herd to feed upon our Þgurative ßesh, which in scriptural terms refers to our secular (worldly) yet
unspiritual actions in the commerce of mammon and temporal, legal Þction. And all herds must
have a shepherd, a protector, one who is superior in entitlement and to whom the herd mentality
stands in subjection. This is the price of such protection for the fallen. For the protector of any herd
forces the issue of such protection only with intent to exploit that herd, either for its strength, its
hide, or its meat. There is no exception to this rule but christ (ÒJehovah is salvationÓ), not for the
lonely farmer nor the church or state.

ACCIDENT OF BIRTH - Any and all particulars surrounding one's birth (physical
characteristics, social background, and even nationality) that are considered A RESULT OF
PARENTAGE and the speciÞc circumstances of birth, and are therefore ENTIRELY OUT OF
ONE'S CONTROL. My poverty when I was young was merely an accident of birth; through
hard work and determination, I was able to overcome it and lead a successful life. (Farlex
Dictionary of Idioms, 2015)

ACCIDENT OF BIRTH - A situation CAUSED BY WHO YOUR FAMILY IS rather than by

anything you do. (Macmillan Dictionary online)

ACCIDENT OF BIRTH - 1. Noun. (Idiomatic) A fact, situation, or PERSONAL

CHARACTERISTIC, which may be desirable or undesirable, RESULTING FROM THE
CIRCUMSTANCES INTO WHICH A PERSON WAS BORN, and which is therefore entirely
beyond his or her control. (English Wiktionary)

—=—

This notion of accident, as all terms of art, is dualistic in meaning. We call in law and in the social
sphere anything that happens in Nature, as that which happens outside of the control of man’s
designs such as lightening or earthquakes as an Òact of God.Ó This alone should be enough to foil
any attempts by the reader whom may claim that the governments of the world do not recognize
the power of GodÕs Nature. But when the legal gods bestow a name, right, title, number, or any

!648
other mark of distinction upon a child, this too is considered as an accident of the gods (of persons).
In other words, some event happened that was completely out of the control of the infant, not
because it was an act of God in Nature, but because the event happened before the age of consent
and in an artiÞcial system over which the common man has no control. But letÕs be very clear
hereÉ while the birth event was certainly out of the childÕs control, the choice to continue living in
false existence in and by the legal name, title, number, image, and mark of that accident of birth is
entirely up to the man acting in such false persona (status). The age of consent as adulthood is a
choice to continue acting in legalized adultery. This is to say that we cannot blame that accident of
birth or use it as an excuse before God and Nature, for God respects no such artiÞces as persons
and titles. No excuses. We may only excuse ourselves before the magistrate gods by our acceptance
of that legal state name, number, and mark. We must use the characteristics of birth and agree to its
legal terms of art and law in order for its accidental qualities to “protect” us in our commercial ad-
ventures and en-danger-ment. We must, in other words, live (Þctionally exist) in sin (synthetic life)
for our sins to be protected and insured against, though our sins are never allowed to be directed
against the gods of the state. We can screw each other over as much as we like, as long as govern-
ment gets its take (tax and fee), and as long as its anti-God legal laws are followed in commerce. Sin
(syn) is based in commerce, regulated under the Departments of Commerce and Treasury.

An accident of birth should not be confused with the notion of an intended or unintended pregnancy.
These terms merely denote the planning of the rhythmic timing of sexual intercourse according to
the cycles of fertility, not the status of the child when birthed in Nature and then into Þction. Any
ignorant fool can give birth to a bastard at any time they may wish, be they married or unmarried.
The corporate contract of legal marriage between public persons matters not, for citizen-ships can
never have legitimate offspring by their legal combination (conspiracy). It is the ignorance of
parental status in paternity and blood relation that creates the accident of birth, as the de-livery of
the child as property in persona to the state.

All of Nature, all of GodÕs Creation, is in a state of alienation comparative to government. The legal
name changes the consideration and status of all things. NatureÕs verb is nouned, if you will, caused
to be subjected by its man-made name The name is property, thus legally what the name is attached
to therefore should be considered as ßatteringly titled property. Names are not creations of Þction,
Þction is the recreation of names, of the terms of art of manÕs imagination. Therefore government
must conquer (purchase) all of GodÕs Creation by naming each part with legal names (nouns) and
titles (nouns). While citizen-ship is worshiped as the apparent source of rights, those rights are
merely political and legal in their assessment, artiÞcial and commercial, having no moral
consideration whatsoever and certainly not of any substance of the Natural Law. They are not
voluntary. They are requirements of law for those who volunteer to stand under them in persona
and surety for their performance. A man has no political rights unless he surrenders himself to the
legal creator and governors (magistrates) of those rights as its legal subject. Be it Jehovah or
magistrates pretending to be gods and standing as antichrists (vicars), man must surrender himself
to one or the other, but never to both. God or mammon? The choice is clear…

—=—

“PROTECTION DRAWS WITH IT SUBJECTION, 


AND SUBJECTION PROTECTION.”


“The protection of an individual by government is on condition of his
SUBMISSION TO THE LAWS, and such submission on the other hand
ENTITLES the individual to the protection of the government.”
—PROTECTIO TRAHIT SUBJECTIONEM, ET SUBJECTIO PROTECTIONEM. 7 Coke, 5a. Broom, Max. 78. (Black4)

—=—

!649
The maxims (principals of law) are all too clear.

But what exactly is “protection” and how is it applied to US citizen-ships dwelling in danger?

One thing is for sure, protection from the State is not that which is invoked through the Lord’s
Prayer, and the negative protections secured by following God’s Law are quite opposite to that of
securing the protection of legal, commercial paper. This legal word protection, while sounding
reasonable and logical enough, is just another reference to the Þnancial tyranny of mammon.
Protection is insurance — a guaranty of the use of the state surname in franchise. Protection is just
another word for security in danger, from the peril of that commercial sea. And it requires a surety
of performance in debtor’s hell…

Just as that bestowed protection of the state requires subjection (obligation) to the state and its legal
laws, the protection of God requires subjection (duty) to God’s Laws and Nature. There can be only
One, and subjection to either is defection from the other. Protection of God under the equitableness
of Natural Law is either limited or quelled by protection of the state, just as the public legal laws of
the state are canceled out by the Natural Law of God. God protects Free, Lawful men. The state
protects persons as its property.

PROTECTION - noun - The act of protecting; defense; SHELTER from evil; PRESERVATION
FROM LOSS, INJURY OR ANNOYANCE. We Þnd protection under good laws and an
upright administration. How little are men disposed to acknowledge divine protection! 1.
That which protects or preserves FROM INJURY. Let them rise up and help you, and be your
protection. Deuteronomy 32:38. (Webs1828)

PROTECTION - noun - 2. A WRITING that protects; a passport or other writing which

secures from molestation. 3. EXEMPTION. Embassadors at foreign courts are entitled to
protection from arrest. Members of parliament, representatives and senators, are entitled to
protection from arrest during their attendance on the legislature, as are suitors and witnesses
attending a court. Writ of protection (is) a writ by which the king of Great Britain exempts a
PERSON from arrest. (Webs1828)

PROTECTION - …In former times the name "protection" was also given to a certiÞcate given
to a sailor to show that he was exempt from impressment into the royal navy. In mercantile
law. The name of a document generally given by notaries public to sailors and other persons
going abroad, in which it is certiÞed that the bearer therein named is a citizen of the United
States. IN PUBLIC COMMERCIAL LAW. A system by which a government imposes
customs duties upon commodities of foreign origin or manufacture when imported into the
country… (Black4)

SECURITY - PROTECTION; assurance; indemniÞcation. The term is usually applied to an

obligation, PLEDGE, mortgage, deposit, LIEN, etc., GIVEN BY A DEBTOR IN ORDER TO
MAKE SURE THE PAYMENT OR PERFORMANCE OF HIS DEBT, by furnishing the
creditor with a resource to be used in case of failure IN THE PRINCIPAL OBLIGATION.
The NAME is also sometimes given to ONE WHO BECOMES SURETY OR GUARANTOR
FOR ANOTHER. (Black4)

SECURITIES - EVIDENCES OF DEBTS OR OF PROPERTY. Evidences of OBLIGATIONS

TO PAY money or of rights to participate in earnings and distribution of corporate, trust,
and other property. (Black4)


PERSONAL SECURITY - (1) A PERSON’S LEGAL and uninterrupted enjoyment of his
LIFE, his limbs, his body, his health, and his reputation. (2) Evidences of debt WHICH BIND
THE PERSON OF THE DEBTOR, not real property. (Black4)

!650
 PUBLIC SECURITIES - Bonds, notes, CERTIFICATES OF INDEBTEDNESS, and other
negotiable or transferable instruments evidencing the PUBLIC DEBT of a state or
government. (Black4)

REAL SECURITIES - The security of MORTGAGES or other liens or incumbrances upon

land. (Black4)

SECURITY FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR - A bond or recognizance which the magistrate

EXACTS from a defendant brought before him on a charge of disorderly conduct or
threatening violence, conditioned upon his being of good behavior, or keeping the peace, for
a prescribed period, towards all people in general and the complainant in particular. (Black4)

—=—

One guess as to what the true nature of a public security actually is? The birth certiÞcate is the
original certiÞcate of indebtedness, the initial creditor matrix (womb) evidencing the event of a
public debt, making that strawman person’s future labor potential and personally acquired
property as a human capital asset the collateral for the debts of the nation!

To be clear, protection under subjection means a Þnancial security (stock) is placed upon the person
(surnamed Þctional citizen) as a bond and surety (in-sur-ance) so that the man who acts in the
undertaking of interstate commerce (as a foreign agent) can be forced by his bonded indebtedness
to comply with all legal laws applying to the Òperson of the debtor,Ó and thus be exacted and
extorted Òin personÓ through taxation and other legal designs under the protections of that law of
false things. The law protects slavery. A debt is any obligation, monetary or otherwise, yet all debts
have a value in money (mammon). A performance debt is a wager of future return. The laws
applied to the person are thus forcibly vested in personhood and so must be followed by the man
acting in persona (a dummy acting in the legal title of another) in strictissimi juris. The legal law of
the Þction, therefore, controls the spiritual Nature of man. Reality is usurped by fakery.

Do you feel protected by having a mortgage lien upon your strawman’s “personal” property?

Do you feel protected by being forced to pay for your own freedom through exaction of the court as
a “security for good behavior” while trapped in its legal persona?

Do you feel protected because you are under personal security of the legal law, forced to follow it
against your moral compunction of religious belief, knowing that the wellbeing of your life, liberty,
property, and reputation are all evidences of debt that can be taken away any time with due process
of legal law?

Do you now comprehend what citizenship really is? Do you think prison guards really “protect”
their prisoners?

Do you think that just maybe the majority of common men must be so clothed in the surety of
personhood and violently enforced legal laws of conduct merely to protect the select few who
proÞt and gain from human bondage through capitalism (control of live-stock by the head) — a
security for the legalized criminal class of men who ensure their reign, danger, and wealth by
insuring and wagering against the Law of NatureÕs equitable means? For what man with
knowledge of these legal schemas and mysteries would submit to being ruled by such Þnancial
tricksters and artful wordsmiths as these?

SCHEMATIST - noun - A projector; one given to forming schemes. [Schemer is more

generally used.] (Webs1828)

SCHEMER - noun - One that contrives; a projector; a contriver. (Webs1828)

PROJECTOR - noun - One who forms a scheme or design. 1. One who forms wild or
impracticable schemes. (Webs1828)

!651
 CONTRIVER - noun - AN INVENTOR; one who plans or devises; A SCHEMER. - verb
transitive - 1. To invent; to devise; to plan. Our poet has always some beautiful design, which
he Þrst ESTABLISHES, and then contrives the means which will naturally conduct him to
his end. 2. To wear out. [This must be from the Latin Contero, contrivi, and if the French
controuver, and Italian controvare, are the same word differently applied, the primary sense is,
to invent by rubbing, that is, by ruminating; or to STRIKE OUT, as in FORGE. But the word
is probably from trouver, TO FIND.] - verb intransitive - TO FORM OR DESIGN; to plan; to
scheme. How shall we contrive to hide our shame? [This verb is really transitive, but
followed by a verb, in the place of an object or name.] (Webs1828)

INVENTOR - noun - One who FINDS out something new; one who contrives and produces
any thing NOT BEFORE EXISTING; a contriver. The inventors of many of the most useful
arts are not known. (Webs1828)

SCHEMATISM - noun - [Gr. See Scheme.] 1. Combination of the aspects of heavenly bodies.
2. PARTICULAR FORM OR DISPOSITION OF A THING. [A word not much used.]
(Webs1828)

SCHEME - noun [Latin schema; Gr. from a contracted word, probably from to have or hold.] 1.
A plan; a COMBINATION of things connected and adjusted by design; A SYSTEM. We
shall never be able to give ourselves a satisfactory account of the divine conduct without
forming such a scheme of things as shall take in time and eternity. 2. A project; a contrivance;
a plan of something to be done; A DESIGN. Thus we say, to FORM a scheme; to LAY (lie) a
scheme; to CONTRIVE a scheme. The stoical scheme of supplying our wants by lopping off
our desires, is like cutting off our feet when we want shoes. 3. A REPRESENTATION of the
aspects of the celestial bodies; any lineal or mathematical diagram. - verb transitive - To plan;
to contrive. - verb intransitive - To form a plan; to contrive. (Webs1828)

SCHEME - A design or plan formed to accomplish some purpose - A SYSTEM. In English

law. A DOCUMENT containing provisions for REGULATING THE MANAGEMENT OR
DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY, or for making AN ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN
PERSONS HAVING CONFLICTING RIGHTS… (Black4)

INSURE - To make sure or secure, to guarantee, as, TO INSURE SAFETY TO ANY ONE. To
engage to indemnify a PERSON against pecuniary loss from speciÞed PERILS. To act as an
insurer. (Black4)

CONSPIRE - verb intransitive - [Latin, to plot; TO BREATHE. But the primary sense is to
throw, to wind; hence spira, a fold, circle, wreath or band; and the sense of the verb is, TO
BREATHE TOGETHER, or more probably, to wind or BAND TOGETHER.] 1. To agree, BY
OATH, COVENANT or otherwise, TO COMMIT A CRIME; TO PLOT; TO HATCH
TREASON. The servants of Ammon conspired against him, and slew the king in his own
house. 2 Kings 21:23. They conspired against Joseph to slay him. Genesis 37:18. 2. In law, TO
AGREE FALSELY AND MALICIOUSLY TO INDICT AN INNOCENT PERSON OF
FELONY. 3. To agree; to concur to one end. The press, the pulpit, and the stage, conspire to
censure and expose our age. All things conspire to make us prosperous. (Webs1828)

—=—

What could man possibly do to further conspire against his fellow man than to create a legal
scheme to maliciously indict all commoners in their innocence of infancy to a Þctional life in legal
bondage in felony against their very Nature by the corruption of their blood rights of inheritance?
No greater conspiracy against God and Creation could be more evil and adversarial, for these
conjurers destroy that Nature with their inventions and trick man into breathing synthetic life into
their illusions.

!652
 BREATHE - verb transitive - …8. TO EXPRESS; TO MANIFEST. (Webs1828)

CONSPIRACY - noun - [Latin. See Conspire.] 1. A COMBINATION OF MEN FOR AN EVIL

PURPOSE; AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO OR MORE PERSONS, TO COMMIT
SOME CRIME IN CONCERT; particularly, a combination to commit treason, or excite
sedition or insurrection against the government of a state; a plot; as a conspiracy against the
life of a king; a conspiracy against the government. More than forty had made this conspiracy.
Acts 23:13. 2. In law, an agreement between two or more persons, falsely and maliciously to
indict, or procure to be indicted, AN INNOCENT PERSON OF FELONY. 3. A concurrence; a
general tendency of two or more causes to one EVENT. (Webs1828)

CONSPIRATORS - Persons guilty of a conspiracy. THOSE WHO BIND THEMSELVES BY

OATH, COVENANT, OR OTHER ALLIANCE that each of them shall aid the other
FALSELY AND MALICIOUSLY TO INDICT PERSONS; or falsely to move and maintain
pleas, etc. Besides these, there are conspirators in treasonable purposes; as for plotting
against the government. (Black4)

INDICT - verb transitive - indi’te. [Latin indictus, from indico; in and dico, to speak.] In law, to
accuse or CHARGE WITH A CRIME or misdemeanor, IN WRITING, by a grand jury under
oath. It is the peculiar province of a grand jury to indict as it is of a house of representatives to
impeach. It is followed by of; as indicted of treason or arson. (Webs1828)

—=—

Ever notice that the word piracy is in the word conspiracy, that the word nation is in the word
combination, and that the word federation (federal) is in the word confederation? Think it’s a
coincidence that these words all mean basically the same thing?

The strawman is written (breathed) into existence, a conspiratorial indictment of the innocent baby
by the federal and state governments of the bloodline People who created its persona. This act of
attainder as corruption of blood allows the bloodline to keep their stolen lands, for no legitimate
blood heirs are being born in the public, legal realm to claim or reclaim them, but only Þctional
persona’s that have no blood consideration to hold land. Their attorneys (agents/proxies), like
vultures, wait in probate for the remainder of the old and legitimate bloodline ancestors to die —
those who have been tricked into modernly abandoning their children (heirs) into de-livery so as to
allow their family land and property to be taken as prize and booty by the still legitimate heirs. For
as the man falls, so too does the seedless Arms of his family tree.

It could be said that the constitution for the United States was merely an instrument for insurance
purposes; a plan between more than two men as conspirators (fathers) guaranteeing and militarily
(executively) securing the privileges, protections, and immunities of those particular bloodline
signers (a particular People) and their posterity of future blood heirs, whom conspired together to
form a nation for and under themselves and their own posterity (bloodline and blood heirs), as
nothing if not a commercial scheme and venture while acting in the combination (conspiracy) of
oath to each other and their private citizens (as a speciÞcally deÞned Òwhite personÓ status). And it
could be said that the Òfounding fathersÓ in their free-masonic glory and in Order of their law
society were certainly the conspirers, schemers, contrivers, planners, and inventors of that artiÞce,
and that they breathed artiÞcial, legal life into it so as to conspiratorially cause all other men to be
their subjects, by falsely and maliciously indicting all other men as some Þctional lower class than
they. It could also be said and is certainly written within that compact that this scheme was de-
signed as a plot to justify and protect bondage and slavery, which in its writing it makes clear, and
that when re-formed by amendment after the civil war, was subsequently reconstructed (through
amendments) to enslave instead all men equally in the debt and obligation of the performance of
surety in citizenship. But this effort only applied to those who could not or would not through
ignorance claim to be of that posterity and immunity through the offer and surety of protection (a
Þnancial security) in exchange for subjection to that design in conspiracy. Only the fool accepts
danger as his way of Life.

!653
Or one might say, through this conspiracy of government and its 13th and 14th “reconstruction
amendments,Ó that the Þctional personas of all common men were breathed (constituted) into a
purely legal existence, charged with the crime of national birth in the bond of nativity, and thus
indicted with legal, original (ancestral) sin from that very artiÞce of inception called naturalization
and citizen-ship at birth. Like cattle, all men were guaranteed to be monsters (hu-mans), naturals
(fools), and thus considered without soul (animal) in return for their subjection as debt-slaves, even
while the capitalists (those who use [employ] and proÞt [extort] from the heads [capita] and Òfour-
footedÓ hands of men) live off the backs of all debtors, using their faith, their fealty, their property,
and each one of us individually as a collective base of totalitarian collateral for the nationÕs credit.
For the nation pledges its property as collateral for its debts, and the common, dis-eased people
(persons) and their future performance in labor are its property and issuesÉ

CAPITA - Heads, and, Þguratively, ENTIRE BODIES, whether of PERSONS or ANIMALS.

PERSONS INDIVIDUALLY CONSIDERED, without relation to others; (polls), AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM STIRPES OR STOCKS OF DESCENT. The term in this sense,
making part of the common phrases, in capita, per capita, is derived from the civil law.
(Black4)

CAPABLE - Susceptible; competent; qualiÞed; Þtting; possessing legal power or capacity.

ABLE, Þt or adapted for. "Capable of contracting" as meaning LEGALLY CAPABLE, NOT
MENTALLY CAPABLE. (Black4)

CAPACITY - A word having many meanings, DEPENDENT ON ITS RELATIONSHIP TO

THE SUBJECT-MATTER. It may mean: ability: actual production of an oil well. An
intelligent perception and UNDERSTANDING OF THE DISPOSITIONS MADE OF
PROPERTY, etcÉ QualiÞcation: size, space, or compass, strength, power or force. SOUND
MIND. THE ATTRIBUTE OF PERSONS WHICH ENABLES THEM TO PERFORM CIVIL
OR JURISTIC ACTS. "Capacity to sue" consists in RIGHT TO COME INTO COURT.
"Public capacity" of municipal property is such capacity as all the people of the state are alike
interested in. (Black4)

CAPAX DOLI - Latin. Capable of committing crime, or capable of criminal INTENT. The
phrase describes THE CONDITION OF ONE WHO HAS SUFFICIENT INTELLIGENCE
AND COMPREHENSION TO BE HELD CRIMINALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS DEEDS.
(Black4)

CAPAX NEGOTII - Latin. COMPETENT to transact affairs; HAVING BUSINESS

CAPACITY. (Black4)

—=—

This state of being in capita, being considered as having capacity for under-standing of law and
thus being accountable to it through our actions in personhood under that law, is not so difÞcult to
comprehend. It is the foundation of capitalism, of legalism, which is merely the valuation of all
men as persons (by legal status, class, and title), as well as that of all their property being in public
holdings. This is the organizational structure of a human capital management system. It is merely
the difference between being considered by blood with rights of inheritance to hold and dispose of
land, or by commercial personhood as a debt-slave and renter (user). And the most important
aspect of this legal state of capacity is this: you need not actually know or comprehend the law, but
only be capable of doing so. Capacity is ABILITY to know and comprehend, not the actual know-
ledge or comprehension in and of itself. It is enough that we act in the person of the state that the
state considers us as legally capable to the law of persons we act within. Again, our actions express
consent to this presumption of law. So one who acts in the person of the law is considered as civilly
bound to the law, regardless of the actual comprehension of that law of persons. It is only the
capacity that is considered; the ability to comprehend, not the actual comprehension.

!654
Under-standing is not the same word as comprehension. To stand under the law is to be bound by
it, to be considered as having standing as surety in court. Comprehension is not required for under-
standing, only participation in that which is a voluntary action of the participant, even without
comprehending the totality of the laws that bind oneÕs conÞrmed and ratiÞed status. Ignorance of
the law that governs use, while one operates and appears as a user of another’s property (person/
status), is never a legitimate excuse by that agent (subject) to his principal (master).Knowledge is
no requirement by these devils of contract law. Knowledge in fact kills the power of those devils.

To take a poll at voting time is really the action of the capitalists (private State land-holders),
through their conspired and constituted schema of established legal government over public affairs
(commerce), when they take the opinion of their chattel holdings (citizenships) as to their group
opinions and morale. A happy commoner in the bliss of ignorance is a happy prisoner, and will
actually vote for his rulers (administrative gods) believing he has an actual voice. Legal persons are
only considered as live-stock; as movable land under the “law of the land,” as will be explained
later in this work. In order to avoid the revolt of the common public, polls (votes) are taken so as to
keep us on the brink of debt slavery without our knowledge, and so we can then be continuously
manipulated through our own collated and ofÞcial Òpublic opinionÓ to view government with
legitimacy and participate in it voluntarily. For a vote is taken as a sign of under-standing, no
matter how ill-informed and illiterate the voter may be. No knowledge is required to vote, only
under-standing.

US Code, in Title 42, Section 1981, makes clear that all US citizen-ships have the right and are
assumed to stand in a capable capacity by declaring that all persons may (have capacity to) enter
into contract and sue and be sued, where it states:

“All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every
State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the
full and equal BENEFIT of all laws and proceedings FOR THE SECURITY OF PERSONS
AND PROPERTY… the term “make and enforce contracts” includes the making,
PERFORMANCE, modiÞcation, AND TERMINATION of contracts, and the ENJOYMENT
of all beneÞts, privileges, TERMS, AND CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACTUAL
RELATIONSHIP.”

—=—

The law cannot give anything to men, only to its own created persons (statuses and titles) through
which men choose to act in franchise (false, legal free-dom within jurisdictional borders), just as
rats have the franchise of their human master to move around freely, but only in the jurisdiction of
their provided cage (in nativity).

Unfortunately, there is no stipulation upon how this “contractual relationship” is entered into, and
in fact this very code requires tacit (unwritten) consent to the presumption of US citizenship and
therefore obligation to the entire US Code in its wording to even apply to any person. In other
words, the law applies only to the strawman franchise, and the beneÞts of contract assigned by this
code to Þctional ÒpersonsÓ requires the legal acceptance of the presumptive, tacit contract of public
citizenship through surety of the man acting in that Þction of law. This is agency. And through this
agency persons may further contract with other third parties under “protection” of their principal.
And to a US citizen-ship, all States are foreign third parties under interstate commerce rule.

One cannot at the same time rebut citizenship and also contract in the person of the legal state to
receive beneÞts. Mammon requires personhood, while God despises such artiÞce. It is very
important to comprehend this distinction, for man cannot be anchored in Nature at one moment
and in artiÞce the next. Only one ÒlifeÓ may exist at one time, Real or Þctional, when regarding the
“opinion” of law. And the very right of appearing in court necessarily means that one is appearing
in and thus consenting to that artiÞce of Þction, for a man may make no such appearances unless
he abandons the Reality and Law of his True Nature. The court (danger) does not Exist in Nature.

!655
Perhaps we can now take new meaning from that famous though obviously misunderstood quote
by one of the founders of this corporate body politic of the United States, for these private men
who claimed to be our legal “fathers” hold us in contempt for doing exactly what they avoid. And
so they and their posterity always have and always will treat the goyim with the contempt we
deserve for falling prey to their own Þctional designs, as any slave master corrupted by his power.

—=—

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little

temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
—Benjamin Franklin, for the Pennsylvania Assembly in its Reply to the Governor (11 Nov. 1755), later used as a motto upon the title page of ‘An Historical
Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania’ (1759), published by Benjamin Franklin, authored by Richard Jackson

—=—

“Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power.”

—Earlier variant by Franklin in ‘Poor Richard's Almanack’ (1738)

—=—

“But our great security lies, I think, in our growing strength, both in
numbers and wealth; …unless, by a neglect of military discipline, we
should lose all martial spirit… for there is much truth in the Italian
saying, Make yourselves sheep, and the wolves will eat you.”
—Benjamin Franklin, from a letter to Thomas Cushing (1773)

—=—

As it turns out, these corporate “fathers” as legal gods of their own legal constitution are given
plagiaristic credit for things that in actuality come straight from the Bible and describe those very
same “fathers” and their false magistracy perfectly:

—=—

“Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but

inwardly they are ravening wolves.”


—Matthew 7: 15, KJB

—=—

Here we are reminded as well that when the shepherd is not as well intentioned towards his ßock
as his words reßect, especially when considering the political drivel of countless speeches, then we
end up in very much the same disposition we are today… we who worship the “fathers” of the
country as if they were our own shepherds, placing faith in their corrupt posterity and not God.

Just another example of why, as the scriptures warn us, we should not put our faith in men,
especially those who plagiarize the scriptures to justify their own creation of a legally constituted
slave-state that beneÞts only themselves and their posterity. Yet others in history have certainly
chimed in to this notion of the dangers of the illusion of peace and security:

!656
 —=—

“Now, it is true that the nature of society is to create, among its citizens,
an illusion of safety; but it is also absolutely true that THE SAFETY IS
ALWAYS NECESSARILY AN ILLUSION. Artists are here to disturb the
peace.”
—James Baldwin, ‘An interview with James Baldwin’ (1961)

—=—

“As distrust, in some sense, is the mother of safety, so SECURITY IS

THE GATE OF DANGER. A man had need to fear this most of all, that
he fears not at all.”
—Thomas Brooks, citation in Josiah Hotchkiss Gilbert’s, ‘Dictionary of Burning Words of Brilliant Writers,’ p. 532 (1895).

—=—

Security is indeed an illusion. It does not Exist but in the mind of a fool, for only a fool can be made
to believe that the Þction of money represents security. Security can only be had under accepted
danger. Even the slaves of those founding fathers had some sense of security from those dangerous
masters. Security is the hook, line, and sinker that leads man to that debtor’s hell in mammon, for
without the devil-masterÕs Þction, no security Exists but that which a man makes for himself and
others through his actions. Truly, the only way to sell safety to the sheep, as Franklin surely alludes
to above, is to sell the illusion of protection in exchange for that contract of performance under
subjection. The protector is always the tyrant, and suffrage of that tyranny is always the price for its
illusion of security. When man relinquishes his natural liberties in exchange for political liberties in
limited franchise (legal free-dom), the necessary consequence is to lose the Natural liberties so that
the security of the false political (artiÞcial) ones may overcome the Natural (God-given) ones. Man
is purchased (conquered) by the offer of protection through the insurance of subjection to
mammon.

—=—

“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of

law, and with the colors of justice…”
—U.S. v. Jannotti, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982)

—=—

ÒThere may be damage or injury inßicted without any act of injustice.”

—DAMNUM SINE INJURIA ESSE POTEST. Lofft, 112. (Black4)

—=—

As for FranklinÕs notion of manÕs neglect of Òmilitary discipline,Ó he was not referring to that
standing army as we have under the United States today, of which was the main complaint against
that central government and king of England in the American Declaration of Independence as it
stood in the colonies. For the modern US federal army exists as nothing but a standing army
utilized unlawfully, Executively without congressional (State) approval, and thus serving only to

!657
protect the corporate interests of the “United States” as a municipal corporation from us domestics
and from foreigners, and to expand its monied interests through violent coercion, force, and issuing
a blanket license to kill in the name of property claims and commercial ßow. Franklin was referring
to the individual, private citizen as militia-men, who would defend himself and his blood from all
foreign entities, including his own federal government. In other words, these were the men who
fought for their own land and bloodline and the power to keep it their own, as compared to the
mercenary army of common subjects that have nothing of their own today, Þghting merely for their
next paycheck with no moral law or compunction towards their own actions, just as the British
ÒcompanyÓ armies where then. It is hard to remember sometimes that each State is foreign (several)
to the other, and that the United States municipal corporation is indeed foreign to all States
(Peoples). And so the purpose of bearing Arms both as heraldry and as weapons to defend that
blood right has been lost in comprehension today, for its purpose was to defend against the
tyranny of centralized government, both foreign and domestic. At the time, that central govern-
ment was of the king. A man that cannot defend himself is a man enslaved, for protection requires
the subjection of slavery. This maÞa model is alive and well in government and always has been.

Here the scriptures also chime in as the origin of this false insurance scam to warn us about the
artiÞce of legalized Òpeace and safety,Ó which simply cannot Exist in Nature.

—=—

“For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction
cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall
not escape… Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day:
we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do
others; but let us watch and be sober.”
—1 Thessalonians 5: 3 & 5-6, KJB

—=—

“And in the latter time of their kingdom, WHEN THE

TRANSGRESSORS ARE COME TO THE FULL, a king of Þerce
countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. And his
power shall be mighty, BUT NOT BY HIS OWN POWER: and he shall
destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practise, and shall destroy
the mighty and the holy people. And through his POLICY also he shall
cause CRAFT to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in
his heart, AND BY PEACE SHALL DESTROY MANY: he shall also
stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without
hand.”
—Daniel 8: 23-25, KJB

—=—

An incorporated church under the laws and protection (security) of the state exists only in this legal
box, out of GodÕs sight and out of GodÕs mind (mentis). A corporation, even a church, is in fact and
in law an artiÞcial person. According to the scriptures, towards this commercial enterprise of
person-hood, God has no respect therefore of the corporatized church, for there is no respect by

!658
God of any person whatsoever. For a person is always only a Þction, a status under legal law, a
purposeful deceit, a falsehood made to appear truthful. And so while a citizen of government
claiming to be a member of a religion incorporated as an artiÞcial person in law and mammon may
believe he is acting as a follower of the scriptural christ, it must be said that his efforts are in vain,
for he takes GodÕs First, christian name in vain. God recognizes only the body, mind, and spirit of
each individual man as the church and temple, not a building or corporation supported by money
(mammon). A person can only use GodÕs name in vain by attaching it to a commercial surname. A
person cannot Truly worship God. A person has no mind, body, or soul. A person is a Þctional
creation and personiÞcation of mammon (valuation). A person serves no other purpose than to
attempt to hide manÕs actions from God under the veil of Þctional, corporate protection. A person
exists for issuing false securities over false things. But this is a hopeless endeavor, for such a legal
vail is invisible to God, and Þction is invisible to Nature. Fiction can only ever harm and be op-
posed to Nature, to Jehovah.

In the end, man is responsible for all of his own actions; a soldier for his own killing, a thief for his
own theft, a politician for his own corruption in bureaucracy, and a priest for selling his own soul
to Þction (satan/the adversary to GodÕs Law of Creation) while inducing others to do the same by
respecting the artiÞcial person of government and false doctrines of a corporate machine. All these
are merely men pretending to be something they are not, respecting the ßattering title bestowed
upon them by the state and clothing themselves in purely ceremonial things. And like actors on
stage, they cling to a false hope that they will be judged by their performance in that artful
character bestowed by men instead of as the legal liars they are, both to themselves and to God.

Nature does not forgive artiÞce because Nature knows no artiÞce. In all cases, things that are
artiÞcial and built of technology must be powered and forced to work in Nature, having no Life-
force or blood of its own. Art is always that which emulates but never creates Self-Existence. What
is not known by its self-evidence cannot be forgiven, and certainly should not be respected. So can
a person of government ask for GodÕs forgiveness, or would that be a pointless prayer? In Reality,
there is nothing to forgive, for the person does not actually Exist in GodÕs Realm of Nature. Man
can only be forgiven of his person if he starts acting like a man of God again, following GodÕs Word
(Law) without Þctional stumbling blocks. Man cannot forgive his own sin (syn) against Nature
(Jehovah), for his ability to do so is ordained only by the Þctional persons (corporations) of church
and state, which GodÕs Nature does not recognize as anything but evil. Forgiveness then must be
acted out in a display of respect for GodÕs Designs of Law and Nature, not whimpered through the
public prayers of Þctional persons in cursed temples. Only through his True and Loving actions
may man Þnd his Heavenly, Eternal (timeless) Place in GodÕs Creation.

The conferring of citizenship is literally, as deÞned above, an alienation upon man. It is an invasion
and takeover of the so-called Òunalienable rightsÓ of man under God in negative duty, and also an
act of foregoing the duty man has to the protection of Nature (Creation) and to each other. In other
words, man is literally selling his soul when he accepts and respects political rights by accepting
and acting within the artiÞce of personhood from any nation (corporation) of Caesar (seizure) and
thus following that false law of nations every false, legal persona is taxed (registered) under. Of
course, the birth certiÞcation process in infancy has streamlined this process so that man scarcely
realizes his soul is lost to Þction by the time he reaches and succumbs to adulthood (legalized
adultery).

To legally naturalize a man is to make (prove) a fool out of that man Ñ to make (evidence) him a
ÒnaturalÓ (idiot) Ñ for nothing of GodÕs Nature ever Exists in mammon. The nation cannot see the
man (alien) until he is legally established through alienation (incorporation), when the man
foolishly accepts and subsists in the governmentÕs offer of alienation of his True Nature. Man can
only be seen by government (Þctional eyes) through his legalization; by the granting of legal
ÒnaturalizedÓ personhood, which is in totality an offensive attack upon all of GodÕs Creation. Man,
in accepting citizenship, becomes both legally secure and naturally defenseless at the same time, for
he has forsaken and turned his back on GodÕs Law in lieu of a legal (anti-God) status - a legal
protection from the binding Laws of Nature with legal permission (license) and sometimes a

!659
requirement to break Them. Ironically, he has also gone completely against the ad-vices of those
“founding fathers” while at the same time worshiping them as lawmakers (gods). The State can
only dominate a creation of God by tricking the man (creature) into living within a totally legal
existence, under a matrix code of legal law that is opposed to that of the Natural Law and Self-
Existence. Government makes man into an employable commercial instrument as a legal person
that is unrecognizable (not respected) by God.

This attack within and by the respected jurisdiction of the United States is easily comprehended
when we consider the legal concept of the separation of church and state, which in man is the
separation of the Natural Law from his own individual conscious actions while acting in a legal
(hu-man) form. The state sanctioned person becomes the offender and the defender — the
protectorate — the sin-eater causing man to obey government’s legal law over that of God’s. The
state replaces religious, moral belief and action with contractual, legal obligation, protecting man
against the requirement of God’s Law to ‘do no harm’ by disallowing moral conduct by and
between men in personhood. The state is the stealer of self-evidence.

A man as surety in personhood is always in a state of unnatural offense against God’s Nature,
which is in Reality only his own Nature and place within It, and thus is always on defense (in a
state of false being) against all of Nature (Truth) by his own consent to the legal law of the State.
For the artiÞcial state can only ever offend the True Nature of man (as GodÕs Creation).

FEND - verb transitive - [The root of defend and offend. The primary sense is to fall on, or to
strike, to repel.] To keep off; TO PREVENT FROM ENTERING; to ward off; TO SHUT
OUT. With fern beneath to fend the bitter cold. It is usually followed by off; as, to fend off
blows. To fend off a boat or VESSEL, is to prevent its running against another, or against a
wharf, etc., with too much violence. - verb intransitive - To act in opposition; TO RESIST; to
parry; to shift off. (Webs1828)

DEFEND - verb transitive - 1. To drive from; to thrust back; hence, TO DENY; TO REPEL A
DEMAND, CHARGE, OR ACCUSATION; TO OPPOSE; to resist; the effect of which is TO
MAINTAIN ONE’S OWN CLAIMS. 2. To forbid; to prohibit; that is, to drive from, or back.
MILTON CALLS THE FORBIDDEN FRUIT, THE DEFENDED FRUIT. The use of wine in
some places is defended by customs or laws. 3. To drive back a foe or DANGER; to repel
from any thing that which assails or annoys; to protect by opposition or resistance; to
support or maintain; TO PREVENT from being INJURED, or DESTROYED. There arose, to
defend Israel, Tola the son of Puah. Judges 10:1. 4. To vindicate; to assert; to uphold; to
maintain uninjured, by force or by argument; as, to defend our cause; TO DEFEND
RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES; TO DEFEND REPUTATION. 5. TO SECURE AGAINST
ATTACKS OR EVIL; to fortify against danger or violence; to set obstacles to the approach of
any thing that can annoy. A garden may be defended by a wall, a hill or a river. - verb
intransitive - To make opposition; as, the party comes into court, defends and says. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is at times difÞcult to alter our perspective in the way of considering things that we have
wrongly considered as Truth our whole Lives, but here we may again see that to be in defense or
support of anything false and not Self-Existent is an act against Nature, an act against our very Self.
That which is self-evident of course needs not be proven, needing no excuse or justiÞcation for its
Existence as part of GodÕs Creation of Nature. Yet Þction must always be defended in its false
existence, its subsistence wholly dependent upon its acceptance in and by the Real. We seldom
defend that which we should, from the wetlands to our very own children, against these forces of
Þctional alienation. And yet at the same time we will defend our so-called ÒcountryÓ to our deaths.
When Þction is more valuable than Life Itself and when defending that Þction is a matter justiÞable
in the taking of Real Life or destruction of Nature, then we are a society corrupted beyond reason
and perhaps even beyond spiritual healing. Perhaps this is the cycle of all nations, Rome being the
immortal corporate model of that circus of moral degradation and death that corrupts all places
through its agents of destruction, as those who destroy through security and peace.

!660
It is that illusion of legal security by monetary means that causes men to be offended, to cease
being in a permanent state of defense against evil, and instead to accept artiÞce in place of action.
No animal or thing in Nature, in its Natural essence of Existence, has any such guarantees or
insurance policies. There is no citizenship under GodÕs Law. There is only defense against all forms
of evil and from the predatory tyrants and vampires that seek to force all men into a securitized
state of legal being. A mother in her Natural essence will protect her young to the death, while
inversely a mother in manÕs legal society will allow state agencies to steal ÒitsÓ children without a
Þght under the doctrine of Òdue process of law,Ó as the Òlaw of the landÓ opposed to the Law of
God. This is a wholly unnatural state of Being. And it all stems from words on paper, delivered by
legally titled agents of the principality of all legal things. Only through word-magic can such
atrocities be standardized as a normalcy of subjection to the protectors. It is they who suffer us to
be in offense to ourselves, to our family and friends, to our very own Nature, and to God at all
times.

To defend the artiÞce is simply to offend God.

OFFEND - verb transitive - [Latin offendo; of and fendo, obsolete to strike, hit, meet, or thrust
against. We use the simple verb in fend, to fend off, to fence.] 1. To attack; to assail. [Not
used.] 2. To displease; to make angry; to affront. It expresses rather less than make angry, and
without any modifying word, it is nearly synonymous with displease. We are offended by
rudeness, incivility and harsh language. Children offend their parents by disobedience, and
PARENTS OFFEND THEIR CHILDREN BY UNREASONABLE AUSTERITY OR
RESTRAINT. The emperor was grievously offended with them who had kept such negligent
watch. A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city. Proverbs 18:19. 3. To shock;
to wound; as, TO OFFEND THE CONSCIENCE. 4. To pain; to annoy; TO INJURE; as, a
strong light offends weak eyes. 5. TO TRANSGRESS; TO VIOLATE; as, TO OFFEND THE
LAWS. But we generally use the intransitive verb in this sense, with against; TO OFFEND
AGAINST THE LAW. 6. To disturb, annoy, or CAUSE TO FALL OR STUMBLE. Great peace
have they that love thy law, and nothing shall offend them. Psalms 119:165. 7. TO DRAW
TO EVIL, OR HINDER IN OBEDIENCE; TO CAUSE TO SIN OR NEGLECT DUTY. If thy
right eye offend thee, pluck it out - if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off. Matthew 5:29. - verb
intransitive - 1. To transgress the moral or divine law; to sin; to commit a crime. Whoever
shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, is guilty of all. James 2:10É 3. To be
scandalized; TO BE STUMBLED. If meat make my brother to offend. 1 Corinthians 8:13. 1. To
offend against, to act injuriously or unjustly. Nor yet against Caesar have I offended any
thing at all. Acts 25:11. 2. To transgress; to violate; as, TO OFFEND AGAINST THE LAWS
OF SOCIETY, THE LAWS OF GOD, OR THE RULES OF CIVILITY OR PROPRIETY. We
have offended against the Lord already. 2 Chronicles 28:13. (Webs1828)

OFFENSE - noun - offensÕ. [Latin offensus, offensa.] 1. Displeasure; anger, or moderate anger. He
gave them just cause of offense. He took offense. 2. Scandal; CAUSE OF STUMBLING. Christ
is called a stone of stumbling and rock of offense to both the houses of Israel. Psalms 8:1. 3.
Any transgression of law, divine or human; a crime; SIN; act of wickedness or OMISSION
OF DUTY. Christ was DELIVERED for our offenses, and raised again for our justiÞcation.
Romans 4:1. 4. An injury. I have given my opinion against the authority of two great men, but
I hope without offense to their memories. 5. Attack; assault; as a weapon of offense. 6.
IMPEDIMENT. Matthew 16:1. (Webs1828)

—=—

How can man expect a government to defend him when that governmentÕs Þrst act was one of
offense against him, the act of causing man to stumble headlong and be birthed into hell as a debt
slave?

If one offends against the laws of God and Nature, then one defends Its contrary law Ñ that for-
bidden (defended) fruit from the tree of the legal concepts and the Þctions of men. Thus one may
easily offend the civil law by acting under the laws of God and Nature in good moral and religious

!661
conscious, which is most often illegal under the legal state. A man acting under the scriptural
teachings of christ is certainly and necessarily opposed and thus necessarily offensive in every way
to the civil law, for the law itself only applies to Þctional persons of a municipal corporation, not to
Creations of God. God respects no person.

Let’s consider for a moment government as the purely offensive entity it is to the common man and
to all of the Nature of Creation…

Legal government again stands literally and in foundation as an offense to God, to the Natural Law
of equity, and to man in his Natural essence. In other words, legal law is a closed-loop circuit
operating totally outside of and in opposition to all of the Designs of Nature. Government cannot
be placed into a defensive position in its own courts according to its own legal laws over persons
any more than a king can be made to subject himself to the law he creates for his own subjects;
except in a commercial or monetary consideration where the government pays a Þne to itself to
appease those foolish subjects; i.e., for propaganda and publicity purposes. If government is
considered as sovereign, then government has no moral (higher) Law or God to appease. Govern-
ment has, in other words, an unlimited capacity to pay Þnancially for any crime that it commits, for
it is the creator of its own money (credit and debt) that would be used to pay for its own sin. In this
sense no crime can Truly be charged as every crime can be discharged, which simply places that
debt upon the public heads (human capital) as public debt. The public cannot in Reality ever win a
case against the sovereign state, for the public ultimately gets charged and eventually pays for its
government’s crimes through money creation (capitalism) under the appropriation of taxation as a
never-ending public debt. It satiates its greed with the payment for its purely offensive crimes, the
closest thing to a religious and moral conscious it has, and reminiscent of the paying for sins to the
church by its permanent sinners in tithing. What one citizen may be remedied in court by govern-
ment, or vulgarly won as a prize of the commercial sea through administration of false justice in
mammon, can only be at the expense of all others, for money represents only the time and labor of
all others. No matter how we look at it, all money is blood money.

The state cannot be put on defense for murder, for the state has no hands to murder with. Its agents
hide behind its strictness of law and protection of persons in ßattering titles as they commit their
legal crimes of inequity against man and all of Nature through licensure (lawlessness). Yet any man
who acts offensively against government or its agents in his own defense will be legally murdered
or kidnapped and placed in captive incarceration for treason. For he is in surety. Government, in
consideration of the Natural Law under God, is always offensive and totally lawless as a
“sovereign” entity, legally extending that lawlessness to any of its agents (titled persons as
employees) within its agencies as it sees Þt. For they are all acting merely as Þctions under color of
law. It plays God. It grants legal license and permission to commit any crime against Nature that
man’s i-magi-nation can contemplate, while restricting the same ordained privileges from all others
without its own eminently granted permission and license. And yet nothing about it is Real or
Alive!

These spelled words of the magisterial gods rule over any creature that cannot decipher the coded
legal matrix of these evil men. We are all victims of causality, controlled by the sheer overwhelming
force of man’s language code through mis-under-standing. The animal kingdom never stood a
chance, merely because animals have no capacity to comprehend or understand language on any
cognitive level. They cannot cohesively voice their opinion no matter how much they may scream
or weep in agony and despair, and silence (ignorance) is always taken as consent. Words have
defeated them, for they have no weapon against words except their vulgar (Natural) animal
defenses. They can neither defend or offend in any legal capacity. They are governed utterly.

And so where does that leave man?

Man is the Þnal frontier. Man is the anointed protector and steward of Nature, defender of the
defenseless, and champion of the nameless. But what happens when man himself is so corrupted
so as to be legally considered instead as some thing outside of Nature, not as a Creature of God, but

!662
as merely another low-life four-footed animal as a “natural fool” that is just as non compos mentis as
any other animal of God’s Creation. What if man is so controlled by words that he doesn’t
comprehend that he becomes helpless to defend even his Self from the spells (terms of art) casted
by such offender’s to God’s Nature?

As we will discuss, it is in fact the goal of the legal realm to alter man’s appearance into animal
form; to strip man of his Natural reason and therefore trans-form man into his alter ego, the HU-
man. If we act like animals, without comprehension and defense against words, then we will
certainly be treated like the rest of the animal (soulless) kingdom. And the church purposefully
mistranslates the Bible to suggest that man has tyrannical dominion over the animals and all of
God’s Creation of Nature, instead of being the subservient caretaker of It to ensure a symbiotic
health for all, the only Real security of Life possible.

Simply stated, they have defeated all of us who are caught under their tricks of spelling, and
caused us to act as defenseless animals to be dominated by false doctrine and technology.

TRICK - noun - [Latin tricor, to play tricks, to triße, to bafße. We see the same root in the Low
Latin intrico, to fold, and in intrigue. Trick is from drawing, that is, a drawing aside, or a
folding, INTERWEAVING, IMPLICATION.] 1. AN ARTIFICE OR STRATAGEM FOR THE
PURPOSE OF DECEPTION; A FRAUDFUL CONTRIVANCE FOR AN EVIL PURPOSE, OR
AN UNDERHAND SCHEME TO IMPOSE UPON THE WORLD; A CHEAT OR
CHEATING. We hear of tricks in bargains, and TRICKS OF STATE. He comes to me for
counsel, and I show him a trick. 2. A DEXTEROUS ARTIFICE. On one nice trick depends the
gen'ral fate. 3. Vicious practice; as the tricks of youth… 7. A particular HABIT or manner; as,
he has a trick of drumming with his Þngers, or a trick of frowning. [This word is in common
use in America, and by no means vulgar.] - verb transitive - TO DECEIVE; TO IMPOSE ON;
TO DEFRAUD; TO CHEAT; as, to trick another in the sale of a horse. - verb transitive - To
dress; to decorate; to set off; to adorn fantastically… People are lavish in tricking up their
children in Þne clothes, YET STARVE THEIR MINDS. - verb intransitive - TO LIVE BY
DECEPTION AND FRAUD. (Webs1828)

—=—

You see, man does indeed have the capacity for choice and free will unlike the other Create-ures of
God. Man is the one Living Being upon this Earth that does, simply because man is the only Being
that can express and understand or defeat the tricks of HU-man language by reasoning. And this
presents a major problem for those few men who seek to be gods (sovereign magistrates) over all
other men, though they have certainly succeeded throughout history in their tricks of spelling and
systems. Only through words and ideas made of them may the overpowering mass of men be tied
down into slavery. Only through worded commands and the promise of money and pensions can
men be made to prostitute themselves as paid mercenaries into violent, legally organized,
militarized murder squads that commit genocide against their fellow man in sole support of the
source of that money. Only through voluntary submission to Þctional nomenclature (respect of the
authority of Þctional words, names, and titles) can man be controlled (governed) through his own
mind (mentis). The mind is governed (controlled) only by the hypnotic spelling and meaning of
words. And only in this way can man be made to not protect all that is Truly Sacred, as that which
should be worshiped and equitably Loved and secured as all of Life and Being in Nature. For
instance, only the desires of mammon could cause man to kill herds of elephants merely to acquire
their tusks to make and adorn jewelry. Money, being held and worshiped so sacredly by the mass
of illiterates, is the ultimate curse.

In order for this feat of anti-Nature to be accomplished — that is, the total enslavement of mankind
— man must be convinced of the perceived reality of Þction. The Þction must become his Òtruth.Ó
He must be made to believe that words are a Reality. Man must be convinced that the Þctional
name is actually physically attached to the Reality, that Nature by name is the same as Nature in
substance as Reality, where of course it actually Exists completely despite man’s names for it. We

!663
must be convinced that the word of the “God” of all Nature equates to man’s legal dictionary and
thesaurus, and that those words are binding upon all mankind and all of God’s Creation in
Divinity. God must therefore be personiÞed into HU-man form, with a HU-man mouth and HU-
man hands, so that manÕs own created language may be mis-attributed as a Godsend. The Þctional,
legal names given by man to God’s Creation must be assigned to and believed by the masses of
controlled (governed) men as part of God’s Creation Itself through the concept of legalized (false),
ordained divinity. This allows the perception that manÕs words have the attribute of divinity or
Godliness; that they are divinely inspired because man was ÒofÞciallyÓ ordained to be made in the
image (form) of this name we call as “God,” though this is not what the Bible actually says. And
these patented words form the basis of the legal law and society that is speciÞcally and yet
paradoxically realized as opposed to God and Nature.

Note here that the words of the Bible are not divine as manÕs false-religious terminology artfully
deÞnes that word, being written by the hands of men, but are however wholly the words of self-
evident reason. One needs not some mystical faith that these words are divinely inspired, one need
only to think clearly without artiÞce of opinion based on technology and other creations of man.
The conclusions of the Bible are reachable by the very reasoning of any sane man, if only the
trickery of language arts, culture, and imagery by the scribes and magi-strates of church and state
weren’t so prevalent in their modern translation and construction. Mammon always gets in the
way of Natural reasoning, causing men to see dollar signs where only substance and soul Exists in
Reality. It is only the self-evidence that may be caused by those words that should be respected, not
the words themselves, which are only the latest version of a created language code by men acting
as novel (unique) word-smiths. Remember your dog-Latin and its purpose! And remember that
only your spiritual Nature may overcome these language barriers that cause a bar in front of the
attainment of knowledge. True knowledge must be felt as well as seen. The Self-Existence of Truth
must touch all of the senses at once, not just artfully absorbed as merely some man-made doctrine
of useless information by forgetful readers in cold, institutional settings and polished pews.

The Living (civilly dead) must be re-presented as the dead (spiritually dead) within the storyline of
this Þctional government as some material fact (subject matter) under a legal (anti-God) surname
and within the Þctional stage-play we call the jurisdiction of a courtroom. The artiÞcial must be
made and pre-tended to appear as seemingly tangible matter though only apparent Ñ as an object
merely of legal tender. But, of course, a legal subject is merely an artiÞcial creation of the mind, ink
on paper, and thus to be Òsubject-matterÓ in court is to be a Þctional thing with no actual substance
Ñ the form of man but not man Ñ a re-creation of man not of God. Man must be made to become
the subject of Þction by his pretending to be a strawman under legal name in Order for the judicial
person (a title) to become the form of a god (magistrate, judge) over manÕs person (Þctional name)
and thus, through the law of persons and in surety, his very Self.

And so, when the judge asks one to place one’s hand on the Bible and to sweat to tell the truth and
nothing but the truth, here would be the correct response from anyone that has read that scripture:

So let me get this straight, dudeÉ you are asking me to put my hand on the Bible, which has no
place in such a corruption as this maritime, commercial, administrative, corporate court of
mammon, an artiÞcial person, both of which the Bible is clearly against, and you want me to do so
while acting in a Þctional, legal (anti-God) person, which the Bible tells me never to respect, and
then to swear, meaning to take an oath to tell the Truth in your legalese language that is built on
lies, and which for a necessarily Truthful man of God such an oath is a redundancy that again this
very Bible tells me to never partake in such foolish oaths, and to do so while lying publicly about
my very own Nature in Creation under God by the attachment of your proprietary legal (antichrist)
surname to my good christian name in order to signify a binding, public relationship under
implied contract in surety, which the Bible says to avoid or I will surely smart for it, and that I
should do all of this just because you, a member of a private law society swathed in a ritualistic
black robe, speaking only an artful coded matrix of legal terms of art, can be given a pretended
jurisdiction and authority made only of the spelling out loud of these magic words in oath, to

!664
become my false god, my magistrate, and thus my secular, temporal judge, even though the very
highest possible law, the very Þrst commandment of God, says speciÞcally that I should take no
gods before the One True God?

Yes, I know that was a run-on sentenceÉ

Now, care to rephrase the damned question and get that sacred book of Law out of this hell?

Jurisdiction literally means the power to pre-judge manÕs actions before God does; to consider man
in a form other than a Creation of God, and to judge (doom) man at birth (nativity) by legal
principles that are opposed to GodÕs Higher Law. Not ironically, these legal magistrates must trick
the man into swearing an oath through God to government to obey and be subject to manÕs legal
law instead of GodÕs Natural One. For an oath to Þction is an insult to God. We swear to tell the
truth in a legal jurisdiction based solely, 100% on lies. Thus, all truths in legal form are lies, no
matter how close to Reality they may seem. Art (words) are never the same as the Source re-
presented, for similitude is never sameness, and artiÞce is never Truth. And so in Reality, we swear
an oath to lie and call it as truth. Similitude is not sameness. If we witness a manÕs actions, we
testify instead that his Þctional person did the perceived dirty deed. We try the name of the person
to which the lie of legal law applies, not the man. This is evident by the fact that the man with
enough money can pay for the crimes of his rented person. And in the corporate realm, the private
man may just resign from the corporation (artiÞcial person) and be immune from the law of
persons, for he pretends the corporation (person) committed the crime as if that artiÞcial person
(puppet) could act without the man breathing life into it. And he calls this a legal Òtrust.Ó Of course,
a trust is always a ratiÞed lie. The person (corporation) is liquiÞed to pay the price of its individual
personÕs crimes. And so the shareholders (stake-holders) walk away with millions.

Remember Enron? Remember that no man went to jail for the crimes of Enron, because Enron is
not a man? Only persons can pay to the gods of mammon for their monetary crimes. Men of God
have 100% responsibility for their own actions, and have no insurable qualities nor monetary
considerations of anything in Nature. And so we can empathize with corrupt men for desiring the
false security of government personhood to escape his Natural duty. No man of God would in
good conscious utilize legal tender money in public, for legal tender may only be used on legal
things, which a man of God would never respect. Only men with evil intentions would seek the
asylum and securities of legal personhood, both natural and artiÞcial (incorporation). Of course, those
Federal Reserve Notes state clearly that their use is as public or private tender.

Jurisdiction is literally an imaginary, public prison for your mind. But worse than that, it is a safe
haven and secular sanctuary for the criminally minded and psychopathic class of the sovereignty.

JURISDICTION - noun - [Latin jurisdictio; jus, juris, LAW, and dictio, from dico, to pronounce.]
1. THE LEGAL POWER OF AUTHORITY of doing justice in cases of complaint; the power of
executing the laws and DISTRIBUTING JUSTICE. Thus we speak of certain suits or actions,
or the cognizance of certain crimes being within the jurisdiction of a court, that is, within the
limits of their authority or commission. Inferior courts have jurisdiction of debt and trespass,
or of smaller offenses; the supreme courts have jurisdiction of treason, murder, and other high
crimes. Jurisdiction is SECULAR or ECCLESIASTICAL. 2. Power of governing or
legislating. THE LEGISLATURE OF ONE STATE CAN EXERCISE NO JURISDICTION IN
ANOTHER. 3. THE POWER OR RIGHT OF EXERCISING AUTHORITY. Nations claim
exclusive jurisdiction on the SEA, to the extent of A MARINE LEAGUE from the main
LAND or shore. 4. THE LIMIT WITHIN WHICH POWER MAY BE EXERCISED.
Jurisdiction, in its most general sense, is THE POWER TO MAKE, DECLARE OR APPLY
THE LAW; when conÞned to the judiciary department, it is what we denominate the
JUDICIAL POWER, the right of ADMINISTERING justice through the laws, by the means
which the laws have provided for that purpose. Jurisdiction is LIMITED TO PLACE or
TERRITORY, to PERSONS, or to particular SUBJECTS. (Webs1828)

—=—

!665
And so jurisdiction is, in other words, bound and limited to the names of persons, places, and
things (nouns). Persons may only act and have protections within the secular liberties of their
jurisdictional debtor’s prison. So too, therefore, may any man in surety to any persona commit
crimes behind such a legal mask of licensure.

LIMIT - noun - [Latin limes. See Limb.] 1. Bound; BORDER; utmost extent; the part that
terminates a thing; as the limit of a town, CITY OR EMPIRE; the limits of human knowledge.
2. The thing which bounds; restraint. 3. Limits, plural, THE EXTENT OF THE LIBERTIES
OF A PRISON. - verb transitive - 1. To bound; to set bounds to. 2. TO CONFINE WITHIN
CERTAIN BOUNDS; to circumscribe; to restrain. The government of England is a limited
monarchy. They tempted God and limited the Holy One of Israel. Psalms 78:41. 3. TO
RESTRAIN FROM A LAX OR GENERAL SIGNIFICATION. World sometimes signiÞes the
universe, and sometimes its signiÞcation is limited to this earth. (Webs1828)

SECULAR - adjective - [Latin secularis, from seculum, THE WORLD OR AN AGE.] 1.

Pertaining to the present world, or TO THINGS NOT SPIRITUAL OR HOLY; relating to
THINGS NOT IMMEDIATELY OR PRIMARILY RESPECTING THE SOUL, BUT THE
BODY; worldly. The secular concerns of life respect making provision for the support of life,
the preservation of health, the temporal prosperity of men, of states, etc. Secular power is that
which SUPERINTENDS and GOVERNS the temporal affairs of men, the CIVIL or
POLITICAL power; and is CONTRADISTINGUISHED FROM SPIRITUAL or ecclsiastical
power. 2. Among catholics, not regular; NOT BOUND BY MONASTIC VOWS OR RULES;
NOT CONFINED TO A MONASTERY OR SUBJECT TO THE RULES OF A RELIGIOUS
COMMUNITY. Thus we say, the secular clergy and the regular clergy. 3. Coming once in a
century; as a secular year. Secular games, in Rome, were games celebrated once in an age or
century, which lasted three days and three nights, with sacriÞces, theatrical shows, combats,
sports, etc. Valerius Maximus. Secular music, any music or songs not adapted to sacred uses… -
noun - A CHURCH OFFICER or ofÞciate whose functions are conÞnes to the vocal
department of the choir. (Webs1828)

—=—

To be clear, as acting United States citizenships we are not confounded or conÞned to a monastery or
subject to the rules of a religious community! The United States municipal corporation, Washington
DC; that district (seizure, distraint, distress) is purely a secular jurisdiction. It is not in any way
standing in respect of christ’s teachings or of that of the scriptures. No religious actions are
allowed, for no religious (moral) law is allowed. Jehovah is illegal!

Please comprehend here that the notion of religion has been usurped and destroyed by corporate,
commercial interests. The church and state exist only in mammon, and so both must promote
mammon to exist in the legal realm as artiÞcial persons (corporations). They have no other choice
and no other functionality. They are businesses, and proÞt is the only goal of any corporation by
law, even a so-called commercially established Ònon-proÞt.Ó For a corporation need not be titled as
a non-proÞt if it wasnÕt dealing in mammon. In Nature, everything is automatically non-proÞt.
There isn’t even a word for its opposite except sin. But most importantly, we must fully understand
that a man Living a purely spiritual (religious) Life is only the man alive that is not bound in surety
to the state. The state cannot see a religious person, for that status is not regulable by the state. The
moral law is like a sharp thicket, and the state avoids it like the plague, for moral law would infect
the people under the state and cause a dis-ease that would effect its legal rule and proÞt model.
This is to say that no matter how moral a man may act, if he is in the surety of personhood and
citizenship, he is not considered according to his religious Nature. Instead, he is required to
abandon his religious, moral law in lieu of the legal civil (anti-religious) law of persons.

At birth, after ÒinformationÓ is voluntarily given by the mother as vital statistics, the newly
abandoned infant is found in the State’s district and jurisdiction and taken as prize of the sea,
becoming ofÞcially registered to the status (persona) of a foundling infant of unknown parentage.

!666
And we never stop acting in that false persona as we suck from the government teat the rest of our
lives, using its name, mark, and number in our conÞrmation of its persona in agency and thus our
ratiÞcation of its legal law as sacred. We sign our name in the cursed form we are acting within
(cursive).

DISTRICT - …The circuit or territory within which a PERSON may be COMPELLED to

APPEAR. Circuit of AUTHORITY; province. (Black4)

DISTRICT - noun - [Latin, TO PRESS HARD, TO BIND. See DISTRAIN.] 1. Properly, a

limited extent of country; a CIRCUIT within which power, right or authority may be
exercised, and to which it is RESTRAINED; a word applicable to any portion of land or
country, or to any part of a city or town, which is deÞned by law or agreement. A governor, a
prefect, or a judge may have his district. Some of the states are divided into districts for the
choice of senators, representatives or electors. Cities and towns are divided into districts for
various purposes, as for school, etc. The United States are divided into districts FOR THE
COLLECTION OF THE REVENUE. 2. A region; a territory within given lines; as the district
of the earth which lies between the tropics, or that which is north of a polar circle. 3. A region;
a country; a portion of territory without very deÞnite limits; as the districts of Russia covered
by forest. - verb transitive - To divide into districts or limited portions of territory. Legislatures
district states for the choice of senators. In New England, towns are districted for the purpose
of establishing and managing schools. (Webs1828)

DISTRICTED - participle passive - DIVIDED into districts or deÞnite portions. (Webs1828)

DISTRICTING - participle present tense - DIVIDING into LIMITED or deÞnite portions.

(Webs1828)

PROVINCE - noun - [Latin provincia; usually supposed to be formed from pro and vinco, TO
CONQUER. This is very doubtful, as provinco was not used by the Romans.] 1. Among the
Romans, a country of considerable extent, WHICH BEING REDUCED UNDER THEIR
DOMINION, WAS NEW-MODELED, SUBJECTED TO THE COMMAND OF AN
ANNUAL GOVERNOR SENT FROM ROME, and to such taxes and contributions as the
Romans saw Þt to impose. That part of France next to the Alps, was a Roman province and
still bears the name Provence. 2. Among the moderns, a country belonging to a kingdom or
state, EITHER BY CONQUEST OR COLONIZATION, usually situated at a distance from
the kingdom or state, but more or less dependent on it or SUBJECT to it. Thus formerly, the
English colonies in North America were provinces of Great Britain, as Nova Scotia and
Canada still are. The provinces of the Netherlands formerly belonged to the house of Austria
and to Spain. 3. A division of a kingdom or STATE, of considerable extent. In England, a
division of the ecclesiastical state under the jurisdiction of an archbishop, of which there are
two, the province of Canterbury and that of York. 4. A region of country; in a general sense; a
tract; a large extent. Over many a tract Of heaven they march'd, and many a province wide.
They never look abroad into the provinces of the intellectual world. 5. THE PROPER OFFICE
OR BUSINESS OF A PERSON. It is the province of the judge to decide causes between
individuals. The woman's province is to be careful in her economy, and chaste in her affection.
(Webs1828)

REGION - noun - reÕjun. [Latin regio, rego.] 1. A tract of land or space of indeÞnite extent,
usually a tract of considerable extent. It is sometimes nearly synonymous with country; as all
the region of Argob. Deuteronomy 3:4. He had dominion over all the region on this side of the
river. 1 Kings 4:11. So we speak of the airy region the etherial regions, the upper regions, the
lower regions. 2. The INHABITANTS of a region or DISTRICT of country. Matthew 3:5. 3. A
part of the body; as the region of the heart or liver. 4. PLACE; RANK. He is of too high a
region. [Unusual.] (Webs1828)

—=—

!667
 —=—

“I shall tell you where we are. We're in the most extreme and utter
REGION of the human mind. A dim, subconscious UNDERWORLD. A
radiant ABYSS where men meet themselves. Hell, Netley. WE'RE IN
HELL.”

“Tis Dante I prefer. In his Inferno he suggests the one true path from
Hell lies at its very heart… and that IN ORDER TO ESCAPE, WE MUST
INSTEAD GO FURTHER IN.”
―Alan Moore, author, excerpted from: ‘From Hell’

—=—

Whatever legal word as a name (noun) you arrive at, the name is still merely as Þctional as the
legally considered space, place, or other Þctional notion (region) of control in jurisdiction it re-
presents. As the legal word above, so the legal word below. Country, region, province, county, state,
nationÉ eventually all of these words circle back upon themselves to mean the same or part of the
same thing — an individual legal creation as a jurisdiction of and as part of the whole, Þctional,
circular (circuit) body politic. Corporate persons are created to control natural persons, and natural
persons are created to control men. This is the non-Reality of the false id-entity and its ethnicity.

The land (earth) requires no name, nor does the water, the sky, or the Life that these Creations of
God in Nature sustain. GodÕs Permanence of ÒjurisdictionÓ is Ultimate, and man may only inter-
lope, sojourn, and converse in intercourse with his own always temporary, never permanent
Þctional creations. Only Jehovah (the Nature of Creation) is Permanent and Supreme, as a self-
evident Truth. And this ÒfactÓ never changes, no matter how convincing the legal authority appears
and despite its trickery upon manÕs mind.

Notice above that a district is purposed for the Òcollection of revenue.Ó But just what does this
word mean in its foundational, legal form? What does it mean to be re-venued?

We must of course trace the full source and functionality of this word re-venue so that we may
comprehend what it is to have legal existence within the legal adversaryÕs (satanÕs) Þctional venues
of artiÞce in debtorÕs hell. For as it turns out, all venues require a venial tainting and corruption of
blood. Only Þctions of law may appear and act in legal venues, and revenue may only be generated
and extorted ÒlegallyÓ from the capita (heads) of legal persons (as state property).

REVENUE - noun - [Latin revenio; re and venio, TO COME.] 1. In a general sense, the annual
rents, proÞts, interest or ISSUES of any SPECIES OF PROPERTY, REAL OR PERSONAL,
BELONGING TO AN INDIVIDUAL OR TO THE PUBLIC. When used of individuals, it is
equivalent to INCOME. In modern usage, income is applied more generally to the rents and
proÞts of individuals, and revenue to those of the state. In the latter case, revenue is: 2. The
annual produce of taxes, excise, customs, duties, rents, etc., which a nation or state collects
and receives into the treasury for public use. 3. RETURN; REWARD; as a rich revenue of
praise. (Webs1828)

RE - A preÞx or inseparable particle in the composition of words, denotes RETURN,

repetition, iteration… (Webs1828)

VENUE - Pleading. The venue is the COUNTY from which the jury are to come, who are to
try the ISSUE… (Bouv1856)

!668
VENUE JURISDICTION - Power of the particular COURT to function. (Black4)

VENUE FACTS - Facts to be established at hearing on plea of PRIVILEGE. Facts which by

statute constitute an exception to the GENERAL RIGHT of a defendant TO BE SUED IN
THE COUNTY OF HIS RESIDENCE. (Black4)

VENUE, VENULITE - noun - A petriÞed SHELL of the genus VENUS. (Webs1828)

VENOM - noun - [Latin venenum, venor, to hunt, TO DRIVE or chase; venio, TO COME. See
VENUS, etc.] 1. POISON; MATTER FATAL OR INJURIOUS TO LIFE. Venom is generally
used to express noxious matter that is applied EXTERNALLY, or that is discharged from
animals, as that of bites and stings of serpents, scorpions, etc.; and poison, to express
substances taken into the stomach. 2. SPITE; MALICE. - verb transitive - To poison; to infect
with venom [Little used, but envenom is in use and elegant. Venom may be elegantly used in
poetry.] (Webs1828)

ENVENOM - verb transitive - [from VENOM.] To poison; TO TAINT or impregnate with

venom, or ANY SUBSTANCE NOXIOUS TO LIFE; never applied, in this sense, to persons,
but to meat, drink or weapons; as an envenomed arrow or shaft; an envenomed potion. 1. To
taint with bitterness or malice; as the envenomed tongue of SLANDER. 2. TO MAKE
ODIOUS. O what a world is this, when what is comely, Envenoms him that bears it!
(Webs1828)

VENUS - noun - [Latin ventus, venenum; Eng. VENOM TO POISON, to fret or irritate. These
afÞnities lead to the true origin of these words. The primary sense of the root is to shoot or
rush, as light or wind. From light is derived the sense of white, fair, venus, or it is from
opening, parting; and from rushing, moving, comes wind, and the sense of raging, fury,
whence Latin venenum, poison, that which frets or causes to rage. These words all coincide
with Latin venio (TO COME), which signiÞes to rush, TO FALL, TO HAPPEN; venor, to hunt,
etc. The Greeks had the same idea of the goddess of love, viz. that her name signiÞed fairness,
whiteness, and hence the fable that she sprung from froth, whence her Green name.] 1. In
mythology, the goddess of beauty and love; that is, beauty or love deiÞed; just as the Gaelic
and Irish diana, swiftness, impetuosity, is denominated the goddess of hunting. 2. In
astronomy, one of the inferior planets, whose orbit is between the earth and Mercury; a star of
brilliant splendor. 3. In the old chimistry, a name given to copper. (Webs1828)

VENOUS - adjective - [Latin venosus, from vena, a vein.] 1. Pertaining to a vein or to veins;
contained in veins; as venous BLOOD, which is distinguishable from arterial blood by its
darker color. 2. In botany, veined. A venous leaf, has vessels branching, or variously divided,
over its surface. (Webs1828)

VENAL - adjective - [Latin vena, A VEIN.] Pertaining to a vein or to veins; contained in the
veins; AS VENAL BLOOD. [See Venous, which is generally used.] - adjective - [Latin venalis,
from venco, TO BE SOLD.] 1. MERCENARY; PROSTITUTE; THAT MAY BE BOUGHT OR
OBTAINED FOR MONEY OR OTHER VALUABLE CONSIDERATION; as a venal muse;
venal services. 2. THAT MAY BE SOLD; set to sale; as, ALL OFFICES ARE VENAL IN A
CORRUPT GOVERNMENT. 3. PURCHASED; as a venal vote. (Webs1828)

VENAL - Something that is BOUGHT. The term is generally applied IN A BAD SENSE; as,
a venal ofÞce is an ofÞce which has been PURCHASED. (Bouv1856)

VENALITY - noun - MERCENARINESS; THE STATE OF BEING INFLUENCED BY

MONEY; PROSTITUTION OF TALENTS, OFFICES OR SERVICES FOR MONEY OR
REWARD; as the venality of a corrupt court. (Webs1828)

!669
VENIAL - adjective - [Latin venia, PARDON, leave to depart, from the root of venio, and
signifying literally a going or passing.] 1. THAT MAY BE FORGIVEN; PARDONABLE; as a
venial fault or TRANSGRESSION. The reformed churches hold all sins to be venial
through the merits of the Redeemer; but the most trißing sins not to be venial EXCEPT
THROUGH THE RIGHTEOUSNESS AND ATONEMENT OF CHRIST. 2. In familiar
language, excusable; that may be allowed or permitted to pass without censure; as a venial
slip or fault. 3. Allowed. Permitting him the while venial discourse unblam’d. (Webs1828)

REDEEMER - noun - 1. ONE WHO REDEEMS OR RANSOMS. 2. The Savior of the world,
JESUS CHRIST. (Webs1828)

DEEM - verb transitive - 1. To think; TO JUDGE; to be of opinion; to conclude on

consideration; as, he deems it prudent to be silent. For never can I deem him less than god.
The shipmen deemed that they drew near to some country. Acts 27:27. 2. TO ESTIMATE. -
noun - Opinion; judgment; surmise. (Webs1828)

RAN - Sax. In Saxon and old English law. OPEN THEFT, OR ROBBERY. (Black4)

RAN - The preterit tense of run. In old writers, OPEN ROBBERY. (Webs1828)

SOME - adjective - SUM. 1. Noting a certain quantity of a thing, but indeterminate; a portion
greater or less… 2. Noting a number of PERSONS OR THINGS, greater or less, but
indeterminate. Some theoretical writers allege that there was a time when there was no such
thing as society. 3. Noting a person or thing, but not known, or not speciÞc and deÞniteÉ
Most gentlemen of property, as some period or other of their lives, are ambitious of
representing their country in parliament. (Webs1828)

RANSOM - noun - 1. The money or price paid for the redemption of a prisoner or slave, or
for goods captured by an enemy; that which procures the release of a prisoner or captive, or
of captured property, and restores the one to liberty and the other to the original owner. By
his captivity in Austria, and the heavy ransom he paid for his liberty, Richard was hindered
from pursuing the conquest of Ireland. 2. Release from captivity, bondage or the possession
of an enemy. They were unable to procure the ransom of the prisoners. 3. In law, a SUM paid
for the pardon of some great offense and the DISCHARGE of the offender; or a Þne paid in
lieu of corporal punishment. 4. In Scripture, THE PRICE PAID FOR A FORFEITED LIFE,
OR FOR DELIVERY OR RELEASE FROM CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. Then he shall give for
the ransom of his life, whatever is laid upon him. Exodus 21:30. 5. The price paid for
procuring the pardon of sins and the redemption of the sinner from punishment. Deliver
him from going down to the pit; I have found a ransom. Job 33:24. THE SON OF MAN CAME
- TO GIVE HIS LIFE A RANSOM FOR MANY. Matthew 20:28. Mark 10:45. - verb transitive -
1. To redeem from captivity or punishment by paying an equivalent; applied to PERSONS;
as, to ransom prisoners from an enemy. 2. To redeem from the possession of an enemy by
paying a price deemed equivalent; applied to goods or property. 3. IN SCRIPTURE, TO
REDEEM FROM THE BONDAGE OF SIN, AND FROM THE PUNISHMENT TO WHICH
SINNERS ARE SUBJECTED BY THE DIVINE LAW. The ransomed of the Lord shall return.
Isaiah 35:10. 4. To rescue; TO DELIVER. Hosea 13. (Webs1828)

RANSOM - The money, price, or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a

captured person or persons, a payment that releases from captivity. In international law. THE
REDEMPTION OF CAPTURED PROPERTY FROM THE HANDS OF AN ENEMY,
PARTICULARLY OF PROPERTY CAPTURED AT SEA. A SUM paid or agreed to be paid
for the REDEMPTION of captured property. Strictly speaking, not a recapture of the
captured property. It is rather a purchase of the right of the captors at the time, be it what it
may; or, more properly, it is a relinquishment of all the interest and beneÞt which the captors
might acquire or consummate in the property, by a regular adjudication of a prize tribunal,
whether it be an interest in rem, a lien, or a mere title to expenses. In this respect, there seems to

!670
 be no difference between the case of a ransom of an enemy or a neutral. In old English law. A
SUM OF MONEY PAID FOR THE PARDONING OF SOME GREAT OFFENSE. The
distinction between ransom and amerciament is said to be that ransom was the
REDEMPTION OF A CORPORAL PUNISHMENT, while amerciament was a Þne or
penalty directly imposed, and not in lieu of another punishment. A SUM OF MONEY PAID
FOR THE REDEMPTION OF A PERSON from captivity or imprisonment. Thus one of the
feudal "aids" was TO RANSOM THE LORD'S PERSON if taken prisoner. (Black4)

RANSOM BILL - A contract by which A CAPTURED VESSEL, in consideration of her

release and of safe-conduct for a stipulated course and time, agrees to pay a certain sum as
ransom. (Black4)

RANK - adjective - In English law. Excessive; too large in amount; as a rank modus. (Black4)

RANK - noun - Grade of ofÞcial standing. The order or place in which certain ofÞcers are
placed in the army and navy, in relation to others. Rank is often used TO EXPRESS
SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM OFFICE. It then becomes a designation or TITLE OF
HONOR, DIGNITY, OR DISTINCTION CONFERRED upon an ofÞcer in order TO FIX HIS
RELATIVE POSITION in reference to other ofÞcers in matters of PRIVILEGE, precedence,
and sometimes of command, or by which to determine his pay and emoluments. This is the
case with the staff ofÞcers of the army. (Black4)

VENEFICE - noun - [Latin veneÞcium.] The PRACTICE of poisoning. (Webs1828)

VENEFICIOUSLY - adverb - By poison or WITCHCRAFT. (Webs1828)

VENDITION - noun - [Latin venditio.] The ACT of selling; sale. (Webs1828)

VENDOR - Contracts. A seller. One who DISPOSES of a thing IN CONSIDERATION OF

MONEY. Vide Purchaser; Seller. (Bouv1856)

VENDEE - Contracts. A PURCHASER; a buyer. (Bouv1856)

DISPOSE - 1. TO ALIENATE, DIRECT THE OWNERSHIP OF: AS, TO DISPOSE OF

PROPERTY. Includes to barter, exchange, or partition; is broader than sell. Under the power
"to dispose of the property of the United States,” Congress may lease the public lands. THE
NATURE OF THE DISPOSAL IS DISCRETIONARY. "Dispose," said of an insolvent, in an
attachment law, includes any intentional putting of property beyond reach of creditors. To
convey by advancement is to dispose; BUT TO MORTGAGE MAY NOT BE, within the
meaning of a statute. (WCA1889)

VENTER or VENTRE - SigniÞes literally the belly. In law it is used FIGURATIVELY for the
WIFE: for example, a man has three children by the Þrst, and one by the second venter. 2. A
child is said to be in ventre sa mere before it is born; while it is a foetus. (Bouv1856)

—=—

Only those who have sold their birthright and allowed the attainder of their blood in corruption
can appear in any legal venue, and thus have revenue exacted from them for that usage. For
despite GodÕs Word, we must respect the lies of Þction by respecting that person (strawman) as
something existent.

It should be noted here that the word ÒveneÞce" is but one letter off from ÒbeneÞce,Ó which are the
beneÞts of the use of the legal, ßattering title allowing a monied ecclesiastical living; in other words,
a church endowed with a stream of revenue in mammon. In the middle ages, the word beneÞce was
used instead of the word fee, as the feudal estate in lands, and held ex mero beneÞcio of the donor,

!671
according to Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language. So the payment in mammon to all
priests (employees) is the veneÞce (poisoning) of their spirituality through the venality of beneÞce.
For the jurisdiction of the fee (beneÞce) under the church and state is only a Þctional venue based
in mammon. A priest must become and act mercenarily to the church and prostitute himself to its
doctrines and bear its marks and proprietary (corporate) ßattering title to receive that corporate
beneÞce (a reward for his whoredom). He must ignore the True intent of the scriptures and of the
actions of christ so as to promote the vicarious actions of the antichrist church and legal state. All
legalized, non-proÞt (false-prophet) churches are monied, veneÞcious beneÞces of their main
corporation (creator), just as all McDonald’s exist only as lesser franchises of the main McDonald’s
corporation, which all follow the laws of the main corporation (in beneÞce) and state, never
deviating into the separate (private) Realm of God and spirituality. Religious actions are not
allowed in legalism, only thoughts. Thus a legalized church may never act against its contracted,
corporate creator, which is certainly not Jehovah. Its gods are only incorporated persons and its
existence depends purely upon licensure and permission from the legal state.

To comprehend the nature of this word revenue is to realize that it can only exist in mammon as a
legal Þction of law. And so the term revenue, as a reference to money gained in the system of
mammon, can only be an extortion from men who have their stake (cross) and estate in the legal
Þction instead of in GodÕs Nature and Law. We must pay to play in our imaginary legal selves and
can only use its beneÞts in legal persona. But the strawman can only be used legally in venue, just as
any corporate denominated title of “Catholic” or “Methodist” can only be “legally” used in that
corporate franchise of the main, legally created and institutionalized church venue. Neither of these
titles are recognized by Jehovah (in Nature). They are simply not Self-Existent, their source being
that of man’s invention.

Again, the importance of swearing and pledging oneself and oneÕs children voluntarily to be
judged (doomed) by man in the stead (replacement) of God is the basis of man’s legal art of
government. And so man must be taken out of GodÕs Realm of Nature; his mind Þguratively
plucked from awareness of GodÕs Kingdom and Laws, so as to be artiÞcially considered by manÕs
artiÞcial legal law in the lie of personhood, and only by the ofÞce (person) and rank (title) of that
Þctional realm. His appearance as a legal creation of man (as a slave) must be invoked and
summoned into the jurisdiction of manÕs dead legal world Ñ the venue of the district. The word
district, as will still be further discussed, again means distraint, distress, and seizure, as a conquered
(purchased) commonality and multitude of people (body politic); as one venial and mercenarily
prostituting the test of the constituted authorities and exchangers of money (mammon). This is the
world of Caesar, which is just another word for seizure under which men are rendered into legal
Þctions in monetary valuation, re-venued from the Real to the Þction. Caesar is the district, not a
man. Caesar is a venue, and government its vendor. The Living man as a substance of God must be
symbolically (Þguratively) murdered in a ritualistic stage-play of sacriÞce for his legal form to
appear without GodÕs protection, made spiritually dead and brought forth instead as summoned
legal entities into the artiÞcial venue (realm) of that spiritually dead district. Thus man makes his
appearance in Þction as a Þctional, legal entity bound to the Þctional laws of the Þctional venue.
The man becomes re-venued out of GodÕs Kingdom and Heaven on earth into the cold darkness of
legal artiÞce. Revenue is, of course, only ever a tool of mammon.

VENIRE FACIAS - Practice, criminal law. According to the English law, the proper process to
be issued on an indictment for any petit misdemeanor, on a penal statute, is a writ called
venire facias. 2. It is in the nature of A SUMMONS TO CAUSE THE PARTY TO APPEAR.
(Bouv1856)

Ñ=Ñ

These important ÒMaximÕsÓ stand as the principles of law, and explain clearly this need to magic-
ally appear in the legal cartoon realm as a Þctional character; not as our True Selves, but instead as
actors (agents) playing the part assigned to us as the Þctional strawman name, title, and/or
number granted by and registered through government. If we do not appear as something we are

!672
not, as a legal creation (registered noun/name) of the state, the court (the realm of the legal gods)
simply cannot recognize us, for it cannot claim jurisdiction over anything but its own persons (legal
creations).

MAXIM - An established principle or proposition. A principle of law universally admitted,

as being just and consonant with REASON. 2. Maxims in law are somewhat like axioms in
geometry. They are principles; and ARE OF THE SAME STRENGTH AS ACTS OF
PARLIAMENT, WHEN THE JUDGES HAVE DETERMINED WHAT IS A MAXIM; which
belongs to the judges and not the jury. Maxims of the law are holden for law, and all other
cases that may be applied to them shall be taken for granted. THE APPLICATION OF THE
MAXIM TO THE CASE BEFORE THE COURT, IS GENERALLY THE ONLY DIFFICULTY.
The true method of making the application is to ascertain how the maxim arose, and to
consider whether the case to which it is applied is of the same CHARACTER, or whether it
is an EXCEPTION to an apparently GENERAL rule. THE ALTERATIONS OF ANY OF THE
MAXIMS OF THE COMMON LAW ARE DANGEROUS. (BouvMaxims)

—=—

Maxim’s exist as the artiÞcial intelligence of legal law, a pre-programmed conscious of moral and
amoral thoughts, rules (opinions), and accepted logical fallacies where none actually Exist. They
are a simulacra; a copy without an original. This is not to say that these Maxim’s stand as that
which is necessarily moral or immoral, right or wrong, or that they don’t allow choice and
corruption to inÞltrate, only that they stand as the artiÞcial, Þxed cortex of thought patterns behind
all other law. They guide a judges decision. As citizenships, we must go to these principles as a
guide or rulebook regarding what the magistrate might be bound to in its “opinions,” else we have
no foundation behind our efforts and will ourselves be swallowed up by the allowances for
contractual evil these Maxims portend.


Yet, if we commit them to knowledge, we are able to utilize them to defeat corruption by keeping it
and its agent (judge) in check. We can only control and move the court if we know these maxim’s of
the law before it, and the judge will always be bound by them as the foundation of his actions and
decisions. For corruption and fraud can only be legitimized by our willing participation in it. And
corruption has its foundation in what is called legal appearance. The Þction must appear in court to
be considered and respected according to its Þctional character. The maxims in a public character
and consideration apply only to that status (person), not to the man appearing as such. But as
surety man pays for the crimes of that legal character in his bondage to it. The appearance of the
name in persona is the foundation of the corruption that is legal law, for the Þctional law only
applies to legal Þctions (creations) of law.

—=—

“There is no disputing against or denying principles.”

—Contra negantem principia non est disputandum. Co. Litt. 43. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

There is only one problem… while these maxims (principles) are certainly not to be disputed, and
while a judge must always hold them as sacrosanct in the guidance of his legal opinions, they can
easily be bypassed and worked around by Þction. The devil plays a strategic game, and his devil-
masters (attorneys and judges) play along with both God’s and the devil’s rulebook, depending on
the disposition of that person or subject-matter that lies before it. And while even in these maxims
of law we Þnd all of these Natural Law concepts, we also Þnd the devilÕs maxims (supporting lies)
mixed within. It’s all about choice. All that is needed is a contract, the devil’s favorite weapon. For
the contract makes the strict law, turning lies into legalized and consented to truths, while the

!673
maxim’s that apply to such contracts defeat all other principles of negative (God-given) rights and
protections.

Christian (gift-given) name Clint cannot appear in person, for there may be thousands or millions
of ÒClintÕsÓ out there, and so the Þrst name is thus too ambiguous to clearly deÞne the legal person
(status as property of the state) as a subject-matter in question before the Bar. Only the in-
corporation of Þction in legal name-form called ÒClint Richardson” can appear as a legal person in a
legal jurisdiction at bar; an apparition; a manifestation of unreality. For the surname is not a gift of
God, but a burden of debt granted through an implied contractual obligation. As for God’s
negative Natural Law protections, when we use the combination of names in conspiracy of contract
with that legal government, we take God’s gift-given name in vain. We attach it to a false god in
apostasy. If we use it we lose IT.

APOSTASY - noun - [Gr. a defection, to depart.] 1. AN ABANDONMENT OF WHAT ONE

HAS PROFESSED; A TOTAL DESERTION, OR DEPARTURE FROM ONE'S FAITH OR
RELIGION… (Webs1828)

—=—

One very important word in this legal Þction is the notion of being called as an Òindividual,Ó where
a ÒpersonÓ is deÞned as an individual, corporation, association, etc. The spiritual aspect of this, of
being considered as part of God’s Creation and as no other thing, is to say that as a part of some-
thing Whole we are in Oneness with that whole, and so cannot be called or summoned as any
individual thing. But each unique person (novel invention) is especially designed to single out each
man and cause his apostasy from that spiritual and Natural Oneness of Self in God’s Nature. To be
considered in persona to be as an ÒindividualÓ is to fall into the Þctional trap of a legal person-
hood, to be singled out from the Whole (Jehovah) as a sinner towards the Whole. This is not the
same as self-realization. The word individual is strictly in place to cause a 2nd self to appear, a false
id-entity not our own that we can be tricked into claiming to be in the stead of (anti-) our own True
Self. We are thus re-venued and are charged individual usage fees and taxes for such revenue
purposes.

A corporate church organized under the legal laws, obligations, and restrictions of the legal state
will never tell you that by joining such a registered, individual person (corporation) of a “religion”
you are abandoning God for Þction, becoming part of its legal body incorporate instead of par-
taking in the Body of christ in Jehovah. Its legal existence requires acquired ignorance of its
members with regard to its proclaimed Source, which is the Bible. For only fools could ever em-
brace that which in its actions are opposed to the Source of what it preaches. But then, we are born
fools. We speak only the language of fools (animals). We know not the origin and thus the intent of
the Bible’s words. We are just naturals.

Ironically, when we leave any denomination of corporate religion out there, the church considers us
in apostasy to it; not to God, but to the corporation. For the corporation is artiÞcially likened to
God’s Word. It is impossible to be excommunicated from God’s Nature (Creation), only from
church and state “Property.”

—=—



“To the wicked, everything serves as pretext.”



—Voltaire



—=—


Here we can understand that everything in law is assigned by pre-Þx. In other words, the names of
everything pre-Þxes and thus presumes everything in legal form (unless the presumption is re-

!674
butted), and Reality may therefore only Exist according to its attached Þctional name in Þxed text
(word) form though the i-magi-nations of men. All things in this legal realm may only exist in their
false appearance; in name only. Everything is coded and thus re-venued.

A numerical existence…

A digital life in an artiÞcial womb (matrix)É

PRETEXT - noun - [Latin proetextus.] Pretense; FALSE APPEARANCE; ostensible reason or

motive assigned or assumed as A COLOR OR COVER FOR THE REAL REASON OR
MOTIVE. He gave plausible reasons for this conduct, but these were only a pretext to conceal
his real motives. He made pretext that I should only go, And help convey his freight; but
thought not so. THEY SUCK THE BLOOD OF THOSE THEY DEPEND ON, UNDER A
PRETEXT OF SERVICE AND KINDNESS. (Webs1828)

—=—

So let us be clear now that the maximÕs of law require an appearance of the Þctional persona of all
things legal (by name) in order to be considered by man’s legal law, which ironically cancels out the
very scripturally based maxims that protect the negative right of non-appearance of man in Þction
(fraud). We must appear voluntarily as something we are not, as a name (noun) with no essence or
substance, in order to be identiÞed, seen, heard, considered, and thus absolutely controlled by the
property (name) of another.

—=—

MAXIM’S OF LAW:

“What does not appear does not exist.”

“Fact not appearing is presumed not to exist.”




“Concerning things not appearing and things not existing, the rule
(reasoning, conclusion) is the same.”



“A thing which is not made to appear is regarded as if it could not be
made to appear and did not therefore exist.”

—=—

“The court has nothing to do with what is NOT before it.”

—NIHIL HABET FORUM EX SCENA. Bac. Max. (Black4)

—=—

Confused? Don’t be. For we are merely deconstructing the big lie one pretext at a time. And the lie
may only exist by its false appearance in a false place overseen by artiÞcially titled false persons
and by your own belief in (love of) that false, legal form of false existence as the falsiÞed and
consented to truth. It has no substance, but its form appears to be substantive fact, as any lie may
certainly trick the mind and so effect the body and soul. The trick is to convince man that he is
merely a legal thing in his own false appearance (of spelling) so that he abandons his very Nature
and Self under and in Jehovah.

!675
Man cannot be summoned. Only the person of man can be summoned. It is the bond and surety of
man to the legal persona, that incorporation of christian name and federal surname, that causes
man to be required to answer in that rented person’s name. The agency relation-ship is thus
christened. The puppet-master follows the puppet, the shipmaster its ship. But neither follow God.
The strawman is driven by this surety relationship, for the strawman is controlled by the agent, as a
dummy corporation by which man as agent is summoned by its principal devilmaster to appear as
that legal person. Without appearance, the jurisdiction would be like an empty cartoon set, with no
artiÞcial life to animate it and thus serving no purpose in its pretended existence. A magic show
must have victims to foment its illusions and tricks upon.

All law is therefore only apparent, prima facie, in appearance only. It’s only relevant if you believe
(love) it. And the apostles of law change along with the law we worship, for our appeal to the
Maker, the Creator of Law changes as well! Again, we choose our god (judge) by our choice of law.

APPARATOR or APPARITOR - Ecclesiastical law. An OFFICER or MESSENGER

EMPLOYED to SERVE THE PROCESS of the SPIRITUAL COURTS in England. (Bouv1856)

APOSTLES - In the British courts of admiralty, when a party appeals from a decision made
against him, HE PRAYS APOSTLES FROM THE JUDGE, which are brief letters of dis-
mission, stating the case, and declaring that the record will be transmitted. 2. This term was
used in the civil law. It is derived from apostolos, a Greek word, which signiÞes one sent,
BECAUSE THE JUDGE FROM WHOSE SENTENCE AN APPEAL WAS MADE, sent to the
superior judge these letters of dismission, or apostles. (Bouv1856)

APPARENT - That which is manifest (only appears by) what is proved. It is required that all
things upon which a court must pass, SHOULD BE MADE TO APPEAR, if matter in pays,
under oath if matter of record, by the record. IT IS A RULE THAT THOSE THINGS WHICH
DO NOT APPEAR, ARE TO BE CONSIDERED AS NOT EXISTING - de non apparentibus et
non existentibus eadem est ratio. (Bouv1856)

—=—

This artiÞcial world of government is known as the commercial world, where only incorporations
of Þctional personas operate under false (ßattering) titles and names, and to which the commercial
law is applied. It is a world based solely on word trickery, for a legal person is made up only of
words. This is the world of the strawman. Only dummy’s need apply.

COMMERCIAL - adjective - 1. Pertaining to commerce or trade; as commercial concerns;

commercial relations. 2. Carrying on commerce; as A COMMERCIAL NATION. 3.
Proceeding from trade; as commercial BENEFITS or proÞts. (Webs1828)

COMMERCE - noun - 1. In a general sense, an interchange or mutual change of goods, wares,

productions, OR PROPERTY OF ANY KIND, between nations or INDIVIDUALS, either by
barter, or by purchase and sale; trade; TRAFFICK. Commerce is FOREIGN OR INLAND.
Foreign commerce is the trade which one nation carries on with another; inland commerce or
inland trade, is the trade in the exchange of commodities BETWEEN CITIZENS OF THE
SAME NATION OR STATE. Active commerce. 2. INTERCOURSE BETWEEN
INDIVIDUALS; interchange of work, business, civilities or amusements; MUTUAL
DEALINGS IN COMMON LIFE. 3. FAMILIAR INTERCOURSE BETWEEN THE SEXES. 4.
INTERCHANGE; RECIPROCAL COMMUNICATIONS; as, there is a vast COMMERCE OF
IDEAS. - verb intransitive - 1. TO TRAFFICK; TO CARRY ON TRADE. 2. To hold
INTERCOURSE with… (Webs1828)

TRADE AND COMMERCE - The words “trade" and "commerce," when used in juxtaposition
impart to each other enlarged signiÞcation, so as to include practically every business
occupation carried on for subsistence or proÞt, and into which the elements of BARGAIN
AND SALE, BARTER, EXCHANGE, or TRAFFIC, enter. (Black4)

!676
INTERCOURSE - noun - [Latin intercursus, intercurro; inter and curro, to run.] Literally, a
running or passing between. Hence, 1. COMMUNICATION; COMMERCE; CONNECTION
BY RECIPROCAL DEALINGS BETWEEN PERSONS OR NATIONS, EITHER IN
COMMON AFFAIRS AND CIVILITIES, IN TRADE, OR CORRESPONDENCE BY
LETTERS. We have an intercourse with neighbors and friends in mutual visits and in social
concerns; nations and individuals have intercourse with foreign nations or individuals by
an interchange of commodities, BY PURCHASE AND SALE, BY TREATIES, CONTRACTS,
etc. 2. SILENT communication or exchange. This sweet intercourse. Of looks and smiles.
(Webs1828)

INTERCOURSE - COMMUNICATION; literally, a running or passing between PERSONS

OR PLACES; COMMERCE. As applied to two PERSONS, the word standing alone, and
without a descriptive or qualifying word, DOES NOT IMPORT SEXUAL CONNECTION.
(Black4)

TRAFFICK - noun - [Latin trans.] 1. Trade; COMMERCE, either by barter or by buying and
selling. This word, like trade, comprehends every species of dealing in the exchange or
passing of goods or merchandise from hand to hand for an equivalent (i.e. money), unless
the business of retailing may be excepted. It signiÞes appropriately foreign trade, but is not
limited to that. My father, A merchant of great trafÞck through the world. 2. Commodities for
market. - verb intransitive - 1. To trade; to pass goods and commodities FROM ONE PERSON
TO ANOTHER FOR AN EQUIVALENT IN GOODS OR MONEY; to barter; to buy and sell
wares; TO CARRY ON COMMERCE. The English and Americans trafÞck with all the world.
Genesis 42:34. 2. TO TRADE MEANLY OR MERCENARILY. - verb transitive - TO
EXCHANGE IN TRAFFICK. (Webs1828)

TRADE - noun - [Latin tracto, to handle, USE, treat.] 1. The ACT or business of exchanging
commodities by barter; or the business of BUYING AND SELLING FOR MONEY;
COMMERCE; TRAFFIC; barter. Trade comprehends EVERY SPECIES OF EXCHANGE OR
DEALING, either in the PRODUCE OF LAND, in manufactures, IN BILLS OR MONEY. It
is however chießy used to denote the barter or purchase and sale of goods, wares and
merchandise, either by wholesale or retail. Trade is either foreign, or domestic or inland.
Foreign trade consists in the exportation and importation of goods, or the exchange of the
commodities of different countries. Domestic or home trade is the exchange or buying and
selling of goods within a country. Trade is also by the wholesale, that is, by the package or in
large quantities, or it is by retail, or in small parcels. The carrying trade is that of transporting
commodities from one country to another BY WATER. 2. The business which a person has
learned and which he carries on for procuring subsistence or for proÞt; occupation;
particularly, mechanical employment; distinguished from the liberal arts and learned
professions, and from agriculture. Thus we speak of the trade of a smith, of a carpenter or
mason. But we never say, the trade of a farmer or of a lawyer or physician. 3. Business
pursued; occupation; in contempt; as, PIRACY IS THEIR TRADE. Hunting their sport, and
PLUND'RING WAS THEIR TRADE. 4. Instruments of any occupation. The shepherd bears.
His house and household goods, his trade of war. 5. EMPLOYMENT NOT MANUAL;
HABITUAL EXERCISE. 6. CUSTOM; HABIT; STANDING PRACTICE. THY SIN'S NOT
ACCIDENTAL, BUT A TRADE. 7. Men engaged in the same occupation. Thus booksellers
speak of the customs of the trade. - verb intransitive - To barter, or to buy and sell; to deal in the
exchange, purchase or sale of goods, wares and merchandise, or any thing else; TO TRAFFIC;
to carry on commerce as a business... Our banks are permitted to trade in bills of exchange.
1. To buy and sell or exchange property, in a single instance. Thus we say, man TREATS with
another for his farm, but cannot trade with him. A traded with B for a horse or a number of
sheep. 2. TO ACT MERELY FOR MONEY. How did you dare, To trade and trafÞc with
Macbeth? 3. To have a trade wind. They on the trading ßood ply tow'rd the pole. [Unusual.] -
verb transitive - To sell or exchange in commerce. THEY TRADED THE PERSONS OF MEN.
Ezekiel 27:12… (Webs1828)

!677
 MERCHANDISE - noun - 1. The OBJECTS of COMMERCE; wares, goods, commodities,
whatever is usually bought or sold in trade. But provisions daily sold in market, horses,
cattle, and fuel are not usually included in the term, and real estate never. 2. TRADE;
TRAFFICK; COMMERCE. - verb intransitive - TO TRADE; TO CARRY ON COMMERCE.
(Webs1828)

—=—

Here’s the problem… our persons, for all intents and purposes as vessels in commerce, cause us to
be merchandise (cargo) upon that vessel (citizen-ship). We are carried (in ships) on the sea of
commerce and trade. In other words, we carry our selves in legal person upon the artiÞce of
commerce (on top of the commercial sea) by inhabiting legal Þctions called persons (citizen-ships).
We are performers; executors. And the money we use is not our property, only a franchise of the
state traded between “individuals.”

But we are more than that, for it is our persons that are exacted (extorted) through taxation, which
means that we are being used as commercial vessels in surety to create proÞt for government. Our
commerce between each other is only a pretext to steal from (tax) our purchases, for we are using
the credit and debt-money (property) of the state to conduct our business, and the law is attached
to the act of use. To be clear, our movable persons are the taxed merchandise being trafÞcked! Of
course, even sex is considered as a commercial intercourse between persons (property), signifying
the bond of two consumers consummating their contract of marriage incorporation, conÞrming
their contractual relationship as one Þctional person in law.

—=—

“MEN are not included under the denomination of ‘merchandise!’”

—MERCIS APPELLATIONE HOMINES NON CONTINERI. Dig. 50, 16, 207. (Black4)

—=—

“The term ‘merchandise’ belongs to MOVABLE THINGS only.”

—MERCIS APPELLATIO AD RES MOBILES TANTUM PERTINET. Dig. 50, 16, 66. (Black4)

—=—

Movable landÉ this is the legal status of a public person. Oh, and cattle! To gain title to
merchandise, man must admit himself as well to be the subjected merchandise (persona) of the
state. He must take upon himself a valuation in mammon, becoming live-stock branded by legal
identity under human capital management. And the scripture (Law) is clear that this is the opposite
state of innocence:

—=—

“Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till
iniquity was found in thee… By the multitude of thy MERCHANDISE
they have Þlled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast
sinned…”
—Ezekiel 28: 15-16, KJB

—=—

!678
But just what is inequity, and why does it cause man to sin? Why it is public citizen-ship, of course.
It is legal equality!

INIQUITY - noun - [Latin iniquitas; IN and oequitas, EQUITY.] 1. Injustice; unrighteousness; a

deviation from rectitude; as the iniquity of war; THE INIQUITY OF THE SLAVE TRADE. 2.
WANT OF RECTITUDE IN PRINCIPLE; as a malicious prosecution originating in the
iniquity of the author. 3. A particular deviation from rectitude; a sin or crime; wickedness;
any act of injustice. YOUR INIQUITIES HAVE SEPARATED BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR
GOD. Isaiah 59:2. 4. Original want of holiness or depravity. I was shapen in iniquity. Psalms
51:5. (Webs1828)

—=—

A perfect example of what is the difference between this dog-Latin as the English language,
considered as the “vulgar” tongue by its creators, and the correct application of the legal art form in
Latinized (Roman) practice, is the perception of what this particular word intercourse means. In the
most base and vulgar of understanding, of course the lower class of illiterates will instantly revert
their minds to sex. Sex sells. Sex is a sport with rules to follow; a pursuit; an inducement to con-
tract. Sex occupies and distracts the mind more than any other human purpose. And so in this way
we can perhaps envision why these legal word-smiths might refer to their own thievery through
the trickery of language as a higher form of communication via intercourse. We get off on shopping!
As long as the slaves are concentrated on the sensual, vulgar, lowest (emotional) mean-ing of these
apparently higher legal word terms, then the master gods of commerce can trick the slaves into
abandoning the product of their labor — their children — to become a ward (award) to the legal
state, or worse… to actually abort the mistake of their vulgar intercourse (sexual commerce) to
avoid the accident of birth. While sexual intercourse is deÞnitely and self-evidently an act of
commerce in a contractual relationship, and sexual intercourse is certainly understood as an act of
legally binding consent to the marriage compact, and is certainly that one necessary Þrst step
towards procreating Life in Reality, commercial intercourse (birth) is the one necessary step in
tricking those parents into abandoning their own blood kin to the legal gods of the State through
word trickery. Legal intercourse is literally the commerce of souls.

When the Bible refers to a city or kingdom of people, of a multitude under man’s law as govern-
ment, we see reference to that people as part of the land.

Strong’s #H776 entry for the word land is ‘erets,’ stemming from the notion of “being Þrm,” and
having various deÞnitions as references to mankind, including: Òinhabitants of the earth,”
“inhabitants of land,” “people of the land,”“land of the living,” “district, region,” “country,
territory,” “tribal territory,” “space or distance of a country,” and “city-state.” Remember that the
word State is the same as the capitalized word (proper noun) People, of the men who are the State.
The government created by that People (as a sovereignty) is the legal state (uncapitalized, non-
proper), referring only to the legal Þction of manÕs artiÞce of law and jurisdiction. In Þction, men
can be considered as land through their person (status) just as any other live-stock. The King-ship
(sovereignty) is a People, the commoners merely the mass of peopled (stocked) lower class persons
(denizens) with no blood-right. And we mustn’t forget that the True church of christ is only the
men who follow the Word (Son) as the Law of God, just as the True Nature of Israel in the Bible
was at Þrst a like-minded and Lawful People, not a legal jurisdiction, city (corporate limit), state, or
nation. It is not a building nor corporation. It is only the respected and shared blood of christ.

—=—

“They say, If a man put away his wife, and she go from him, and become
another man's, shall he return unto her again? shall not that LAND be
greatly polluted? but thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet

!679
return again to me, saith the LORD (translated here only of JEHOVAH, i.e.
“THE EXISTING ONE”). Lift up thine eyes unto the high places, and see
where thou hast not been lien with. In the ways hast thou sat for them, as
the Arabian in the wilderness; and thou hast polluted the LAND with thy
whoredoms and with thy wickedness… And I saw, when for all the causes
WHEREBY BACKSLIDING ISRAEL COMMITTED ADULTERY I had put
HER away, and given HER a bill of DIVORCE; yet HER TREACHEROUS
SISTER JUDAH feared not, but went and played the harlot also.”
—Jeremiah 3: 1-2 and 8, KJB

—=—

Yet again the Þgurative nature of the scriptural teachings shines through here, as the assignment of
sexual orientation to nations of people (ÒsheÓ), as if Israel and Judah were as whores prostituting
themselves to that which is against GodÕs Nature (Jehovah). This, again, is personiÞcation; an
anthropomorphizing of that idea and invention of man which does not Exist in Nature (a nation of
persons as a single body politic) into an existing and animated persona for the purposes of telling a
story (parable), and to which a moral ending, that of returning to the Law of Jehovah, is sought
through its parabolic intent. This is the very nature of the scriptures, though not that of the corp-
orate religions, which seek to replace vicariously Jehovah with their own brand of legalized
religious Þction approved by the CEOÕs and other gods of church and state. No one in their right
mind can mistake this verse as the literal speaking of some individual woman in history. Israel is
allegorically being personiÞed here into a woman, a collective People anthropomorphized into a
single prostitute or harlot that acts against the Law of Jehovah, just as the common people (goyim)
of the modern nations, and especially the whore that is the multitude of collective, public-minded
goyim of the United States. This form of parabolic storytelling is the whole of the Bible. Again, a
parable in the mouth of fools is like the legs of the lame, as effectual as the dog that returneth to
and consumes its own vomit (logic).

Commerce is more than just the action of buying and selling or of trade or barter. To be a
commercial citizen-ship in agency is to be and act as the actual ÒmovableÓ thing (property) by
which the laws of trafÞcking are collaterally based upon in a contractual surety. This is human
capital management, which is the only purpose of government in mammon. It is man treated as
money (in valuation) and counted by the head (per capita) via the treasure-trove of found surnames
(property). To live an artiÞcial, commercial life in the legal Þction of citizen-ship is to have your
entire being valued as merely a legal estate within interstate commerce. Again, this legal life is
absolutely opposed to Jehovah; as living by commercial law of mammon instead of that Highest
Natural Law, as legal commerce in the very Nature of Life Itself.

These gods may only exist as capitalists Ñ those parasites exact and extort from the tributary
(taxed) labor and pains of all others. For their investments are us, and the return from their in-
vestments are the product of our labor potential (intercourse), be it sexual products (children of the
proles) or the employment (use) of our time and energy. They even trick us into investing in our
own personÕs performances under the devilÕs contract of life and social insurances!

CAPITALIST - One exclusively dependent on accumulated property, whether denoting a

person of large wealth or one having an income from investments. The word has no legal
meaning. (Black4)

CAPITALIST - noun - A man who has a capital or STOCK in trade, usually denoting A MAN
OF LARGE PROPERTY, WHICH IS OR MAY BE EMPLOYED IN BUSINESS. (Webs1828)

!680
 CAPITALLY - adverb - 1. In a capital manner; NOBLY; Þnely. 2. WITH LOSS OF LIFE; as, to
punish capitally. (Webs1828)

—=—

Slave-masters and property-holders have always been considered as the nobility; those who deal in
and control men in a capital manner (by taking their Life and blood as legal property in slavery or
indenture). No historical digging is required for that well-known fact and history.

Of course, words that perfectly describe the very structure of the crimes these legal gods commit by
clandestinely accumulating for themselves all of man’s “registered property” through trickery and
word magic will be stricken from the legal nomenclature. Otherwise, to be charged with being a
ÒcapitalistÓ would surely be a horriÞc crime worthy of the highest punishment. That is, if mammon
was not the accepted god and man was Living rationally and in Right reason of mind. The creators,
the sovereignty, certainly would not deÞne themselves as criminals, instead licensing their acts
legally under their own civil law and created governments, invoking the very power and authority
of God even while deÞling Its Laws. The legal code instead must be strung together in due
diligence and read between the lines; the very nature and purpose of this work. For their greatest
trick is in making us ignorantly volunteer to be their subjected debt-slaves; as satan’s greatest trick,
fooling us to believe that these capitalist adversaries of man don’t actually Exist.

Capitalism is only the slave-trade hidden behind commercial personhood. It is slavery indirectly
applied to men by placing value upon the surety bond of man’s person and its future labor
potential, by employment (use) and through birth and de-livery of new infantile persons.

Like a computer simulation, the imaginary jurisdiction of this commercial world is everywhere and
yet it is nowhere. It is the ultimate simulacrum. It is literally a matrix of legal Þction that has been so
pulled over our senses and used to guide and control our everyday activities that most of us have
hardly any inkling it even exists or that we are even participating in it. For we blindly appear within
it, usually without ever contemplating our own personal pretext of a voluntary, Þctional disposition
under its created maxims. We believe we appear as our own True Selves, without realizing we are
actually appearing in a form that is property of another. The chains are not visible or tangible, yet
the code of legal words permanently attaches us to the Þction in bond and surety simply because
we believe in (love), put faith in (respect), contract with (bind ourselves in debt to), and pay
allegiance to it as debtors to the big lie.



Commerce is human trafÞcking, the business of human intercourse, as a communication and trade
in souls. To act merely for money and in the pursuit of it is to act only in the persona of mammon.
And only through money’s pure illusion as the ultimate form of wealth can man be made to give
up everything Real in Life and in Nature in pursuit instead of the simulation of its Þctional,
monetary value that blinds our reason and logic and replaces all conscious examination with mere
logical fallacy.

Our faith is our pledge in allegiance to the money system of the nation, and this action literally
alienates us from Reality. When a religious man pledges himself and his allegiance to the state (an
artiÞcial person), he necessarily and literally loses his True religion and its negative Law
protections. As the dollar bill states: In mammon (god) we trust…

SUI JURIS - Latin. OF HIS OWN RIGHT; possessing full social and civil rights; not under
any legal disability, or the power of another, or guardianship. Having capacity to manage
one's own affairs; not under legal disability to act for one's self. (Black4)

ALIENI JURIS - Latin. UNDER THE CONTROL, OR SUBJECT TO THE AUTHORITY, OF

ANOTHER PERSON; e.g., an INFANT who is under the authority of his FATHER OR
GUARDIAN; a wife under the power of her husband. The term is contrasted with Sui
Juris… (Black4)

!681
ALIENI JURIS - Words applied to PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO THE AUTHORITY
OF ANOTHER. An infant who is under the authority of his father or guardian, and a wife
under the power of her husband, are said to be alieni juris. Vide sui juris. (Bouv1856)

ALIENIGENA - One of FOREIGN BIRTH; AN ALIEN. (Black4)

ALIENISM - The state, condition, or character of an alien. (Black4)

ALIENAGE - The condition or state of alien. (Bouv1856)

ALIENIST - One who has specialized in the study of MENTAL DISEASES. PERSONS
qualiÞed by experience, knowledge, and previous opportunities to express opinion as to
defendant's mental condition at a particular time. (Black4)

ALIENOR - He who makes a grant, transfer of title, conveyance, or alienation. Correlative of

alienee. (Black4)

ALIENEE - One to whom an alienation, conveyance, or transfer of property is made. See

Alienor. (Black4)

ALIENUS - Latin. Another's; BELONGING TO ANOTHER; THE PROPERTY OF

ANOTHER. Alienus homo, ANOTHER'S MAN, OR SLAVE. Aliena res, ANOTHER'S
PROPERTY. (Black4)

ALIEN - noun - A FOREIGNER; one born abroad. A PERSON WHO OWES ALLEGIANCE
TO A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT. (Webs1828)

ALIEN - noun - AN AMERICAN SOVEREIGN IN HIS PROBATIONARY STATE. (The

Devil’s Dictionary, by Ambrose Beirce, 1911)

LIGEANCE - The TRUE AND FAITHFUL OBEDIENCE OF A SUBJECT TO HIS

SOVEREIGN, OF A CITIZEN TO HIS GOVERNMENT. It signiÞes also THE TERRITORY
OF A SOVEREIGN. See Allegiance. (Black4)

ALLEGIANCE - THE TIE WHICH BINDS THE CITIZEN TO THE GOVERNMENT, in

return for the PROTECTION which the government affords him. 2. It is NATURAL,
ACQUIRED, or LOCAL. Natural allegiance is such as is due from all men BORN within the
United States; acquired allegiance is that which is due by a NATURALIZED citizen. It has
never been decided whether a citizen can, by expatriation, divest himself absolutely of that
character. INFANTS CANNOT ASSUME ALLEGIANCE, ALTHOUGH THEY ENLIST IN
THE ARMY OF THE UNITED STATES. 3. It seems, however, that he cannot renounce his
allegiance to the United States without the permission of the government, to be declared by
law. But FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES HE MAY ACQUIRE THE RIGHTS OF A
CITIZEN OF ANOTHER COUNTRY, AND THE PLACE OF HIS DOMICIL DETERMINES
THE CHARACTER OF A PARTY AS TO TRADE. 4. Local allegiance is that which is DUE
FROM AN ALIEN, WHILE RESIDENT in the United States, for the protection which the
government affords him. (Black4)

ALLEGIANCE - noun - [Latin alligo, of ad and ligo, to bind. See Liege and League.] The tie or
obligation of a subject to his Prince OR GOVERNMENT; THE DUTY OF FIDELITY to a
king, GOVERNMENT OR STATE. EVERY NATIVE OR CITIZEN OWES ALLEGIANCE TO
THE GOVERNMENT UNDER WHICH HE IS BORN. This is called NATURAL OR
IMPLIED ALLEGIANCE which arises FROM THE CONNECTION OF A PERSON WITH
THE SOCIETY IN WHICH HE IS BORN, and his DUTY to be a FAITHFUL SUBJECT,
independent of any express promise. Express allegiance is that obligation which proceeds
from AN EXPRESS PROMISE, OR OATH OF FIDELITY. Local or temporary allegiance is
due from an alien to THE GOVERNMENT OR STATE IN WHICH HE RESIDES. (Webs1828)

!682
 LIEGE - adjective - [Latin ligo, TO BIND; Gr. to bind, to bend; a withe.] 1. BOUND BY A
FEUDAL TENURE; obliged to be faithful and loyal to a superior, AS A VASSAL TO HIS
LORD; SUBJECT; faithful; as a liege man. By liege homage, a vassal was bound to serve his
lord against all, WITHOUT EXCEPTING HIS SOVEREIGN; or against all, excepting a
former lord to whom he owed like service. 2. SOVEREIGN; as a liege lord. [See the noun.] -
noun - [supra.] 1. A vassal holding a fee by which he is BOUND TO PERFORM CERTAIN
SERVICES AND DUTIES TO HIS LORD. 2. A lord or superior; A SOVEREIGN. [Note. This
is a false application of the word, arising probably from transferring the word from the vassal
to the lord; the lord of liege men, being called liege lord. (Webs1828)

LEAGUE - noun - leeg. [Latin ligo, TO BIND.] 1. An alliance or CONFEDERACY between

princes or STATES for their mutual aid or defense; A NATIONAL CONTRACT OR
COMPACT. A league may be offensive or defensive, or both. It is offensive, when the
contracting parties agree to unite in attacking a common enemy; defensive, when the parties
agree to act in concert in defending each other against an enemy. 2. A COMBINATION or
UNION of two or more parties for the purpose of maintaining friendship and promoting
their mutual interest, OR FOR EXECUTING ANY DESIGN IN CONCERT. And let there be
'twixt us and them no league nor amity. - verb intransitive - leeg. 1. To unite, as princes or
STATES IN A CONTRACT of amity for mutual aid or defense; TO CONFEDERATE. Russia
and Austria leagued to oppose the ambition of Buonaparte. 2. TO UNITE OR CON-
FEDERATE, AS PRIVATE PERSONS for mutual aid. - noun - leeg. [Low Latin leuca.] 1.
Originally, a stone erected on the public roads, at certain distances, in the manner of the
modern mile-stones. Hence, 2. The distance between two stones. With the English and
Americans, a league is the length of three miles; but this measure is chießy AT SEA. The
league on the continent of Europe, is very different among different nations. The Dutch and
German league contains four geographical miles. (Webs1828)

RESIDE - verb intransitive - s as z. [Latin resideo, resido; re and sedeo, to sit, TO SETTLE.] 1. to
dwell permanently OR FOR A LENGTH OF TIME; to have a settled abode FOR A TIME.
The peculiar uses of this word are to be noticed. When the word is applied to the NATIVES
of a state, or others who DWELL in it AS PERMANENT CITIZENS, we use it only with
reference to the part of a city or country in which a man DWELLS. We do not say generally
that Englishmen reside in England, but a particular citizen resides in London or York, or at
such a house in such a street, in the Strand, etc. When the word is applied to STRANGERS
OR TRAVELERS, we do not say, a man resides in an inn for a night, but he resided in London
or Oxford a month, or a year; or part of his life. A man lodges, stays, remains, abides, for a
day or very short time, but reside implies a longer TIME, though NOT DEFINITE. 2. To sink
to the bottom of liquors; to settle. Obsolete. [In this sense, subside is now used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

Here we see the main difference between a resident and a domicile. A domicile (called also as
permanent resident) is timeless, meaning that it does not end at some speciÞed or contracted time
and is thus passed from generation to generation through blood connection of ancestry. But notice
that any temporary residence is always based on a contract of time, meaning that it may only be
used upon the beneÞcent granting of another, a stranger, and so is not something that is inheritable
by blood. In fact, he who holds temporary residence without private domicile, namely public
citizenships, cannot pass anything to their abandoned children as wards of the state in de-livery
due to this corruption of blood. What is in the time domain is only ever public in nature, not
private. Blood ßows eternally until it is pretended to be attainted, but there is always a prodigal
heir out there. And so again the temporary resident must create a legal will, since the law
recognizes no Real blood connection to a public citizenship or its legalized (Romanized) issues.

STRANGER - noun - 1. A FOREIGNER; ONE WHO BELONGS TO ANOTHER COUNTRY.

Paris and London are visited by strangers from all the countries of Europe. 2. One of another
town, city, STATE or province IN THE SAME COUNTRY. The Commencements in American

!683
 colleges are frequented by multitudes of strangers from the neighboring towns and states. 3.
One unknown. The gentleman is a stranger to me. 4. One unacquainted. My child is yet a
stranger to the world. I was no stranger to the original. 5. A GUEST; A VISITOR. 6. ONE
NOT ADMITTED to any communication or FELLOWSHIP. Melons on beds of ice are taught
to bear, and strangers to the sun yet ripen here. 7. In law, ONE NOT PRIVY OR PARTY TO
AN ACT. - verb intransitive - TO ESTRANGE; TO ALIENATE. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

ESTRANGE - verb transitive - 1. To keep at a distance; to withdraw; to cease to frequent and

be FAMILIAR (family) with. Had we estranged ourselves from them in things indifferent. I
thus estrange my person from her bed. 2. TO ALIENATE; TO DIVERT FROM ITS
ORIGINAL USE OR POSSESSOR; TO APPLY TO A PURPOSE FOREIGN FROM ITS
ORIGINAL or customary one. They have estranged this place, and burnt incense in it to other
gods. Jeremiah 19:4. 3. To alienate, as the affections; to turn from kindness to indifference or
malevolence. I do not know, to this hour, what it is that has estranged him from me. 4. To
withdraw; to withhold. We must estrange our belief from what is not clearly evidenced.
(Webs1828)

ALIENATE - verb transitive - [Latin alieno.] 1. TO TRANSFER TITLE, PROPERTY OR RIGHT

TO ANOTHER; as, TO ALIENATE LANDS, OR SOVEREIGNTY. 2. TO ESTRANGE; to
withdraw, as the affections; to make indifferent or averse, where love or friendship before
subsisted; with from; as, to alienate the heart or affections; to alienate a man from the friends
of his youth. 3. TO APPLY TO A WRONG USE. They shall not alienate the Þrst fruits of the
land. Ezekiel 48:14. - adjective - [Latin alienatus.] Estranged; withdrawn from; STRANGER TO;
with from. O ALIENATE FROM GOD, O spirit accurst. The whigs were alienate from truth.
(Webs1828)

ALIEN - adjective - alyen, [Latin alienus, from alius, another. Latin alieno, to alienate; alter,
another, to altercate.] 1. FOREIGN; NOT BELONGING TO THE SAME COUNTRY, LAND
OR GOVERNMENT. 2. Belonging to one who is not a citizen. 3. Estranged; foreign; not
allied; adverse to; as, principles alien from our religion. - noun - alyen. 1. A foreigner; one
born in, or belonging to, another country; ONE WHO IS NOT A DENIZEN, OR ENTITLED
TO THE PRIVILEGES OF A CITIZEN. 2. IN SCRIPTURE, ONE WHO IS A STRANGER TO
THE CHURCH OF CHRIST, OR TO THE COVENANT OF GRACE. At that time, ye were
WITHOUT CHRIST, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel. Ephesians 2:12. In
France, A CHILD BORN OF RESIDENTS WHO ARE NOT CITIZENS, is an alien. In Great
Britain, THE CHILDREN OF ALIENS BORN IN THAT COUNTRY, ARE MOSTLY
NATURAL BORN SUBJECTS; and the children of British subjects, owing allegiance to the
crown of England, though born in other countries, ARE NATURAL SUBJECTS, AND
ENTITLED TO THE PRIVILEGES OF RESIDENT CITIZENS. Alien-duty, a tax upon goods
imported by aliens, beyond the duty on the like goods imported by citizens; a discriminating
duty on the tonnage of ships belonging to aliens, or any extra duties imposed by laws or edicts
on aliens. (Webs1828)


—=—

US citizenships (strangers/legalized foreigners/alien friends or enemies) are not privy or party to

the constitution, for they are creations under it. They are “resident citizens” only; denizens. Only
those over it (in creation of it) in sovereignty are actually privy or private parties of its negatively
protective law of immunity. Let us consider the 14th amendment to the US constitution here, for a
private citizen is not born of a nation but in private (foreign) blood inheritance as an heir, and is
thus only a participant in the nature of its covenant, not a subject to it. The agreer (as the People) is
certainly not a subject of itself. Private citizens (as a status) are outside of the United States and
thus garner its negative protections, whereas public citizen-ships are born and remain inside of
what that paper constitution created (constituted in debt compact) as a commercial government for
slaves and volunteers.

!684
 —=—

“All PERSONS BORN OR NATURALIZED IN the United States, and

SUBJECT to the JURISDICTION THEREOF, ARE CITIZENS OF THE
UNITED STATES and of the state wherein they RESIDE. NO STATE
SHALL MAKE OR ENFORCE ANY LAW WHICH SHALL ABRIDGE
THE PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED
STATES…”
—from the 14th amendment (article) to the United States constitution

—=—

Again we see that the individual (several) States or their respective commercial governments
(states) cannot trump the law of the United States over and in consideration of its domiciled
citizenships acting in temporary, commercial residence within any of those foreign state govern-
ment jurisdictions. For the citizen-ship (person) is of course “BORN OF” or natural to (of the
artiÞcial nature/creation of) the United StatesÕ district, and the state is merely a third party agency
to that foreign agent (citizen-ship) of the United States (principal). To be clear, this constitutional
amendment is not talking about the “persons” (status) of private citizens of untainted blood, only
about Þctional persons, or more accurately, the men who act publicly in interstate commerce within
a United States person (status) as their vessel in surety while participating in foreign intercourse
within each private (foreign) state jurisdiction. We know this because private State citizens are not
born and registered in the district of United States.

—=—

“AN ALIEN HOLDS NO LANDS.”

— EXTERUS NON HABET TERRAS. Tray.Lat.Max. 203. (Black4)

—=—

Only the private People (private estates) are protected by their own constitution, which is only to
say that their private, negative, reserved rights cannot be thwarted by that central government as
constituted. Citizenships (residents) are not thus protected, for all rights of a person of the United
States are strictly permitted and strictly administered positively and without possibility of
reservation. The private People are not 14th amendment citizens, and their reserved, self-existent
(unalienable) rights donÕt come from the constitution but in spite of it, for their legal status is not
publicly born (created) or naturalized (legalized) under, but over the United States. They are not
goyim of any nation. Private persons are not public persons. Private citizens are not public citizen-
ships.

So what exactly is allegiance according to the magistrate gods in the United States courts?

—=—

ALLEGIANCE:

“The tie or ligamen which BINDS THE SUBJECT [OR CITIZEN] TO

THE KING [OR GOVERNMENT] in return for that protection which
the king [or government] affords the subject [or citizen].” It consists in

!685
 “a true and FAITHFUL OBEDIENCE OF THE SUBJECT DUE TO HIS
SOVEREIGN,” and is a comparatively modern corruption of ligeance
(ligeantia), which is derived from liege (ligius), meaning ABSOLUTE
OR UNQUALIFIED. It signiÞed originally liege fealty. I.e. absolute and
unqualiÞed FEALTY.”

“…IN THE UNITED STATES, ‘IT IS A POLITICAL OBLIGATION’

DEPENDING NOT ON OWNERSHIP OF LAND, BUT ON THE
ENJOYMENT OF THE PROTECTION OF GOVERNMENT: AND IT
‘BINDS THE CITIZEN TO THE OBSERVANCE OF ALL LAWS’ OF HIS
OWN SOVEREIGN.”
—1 B1.Comm. 366 and 7 Coke, 4b, (Black4) 18 L.Q.Rev. 47. —Wallace v. Harmstad. 44 Pa. 492. —Adams v. People, 1N.Y.173. (Black4)

—=—

Pay the maÞa, and the maÞa will protect you. ItÕs the lawÉ of master and servant.

After all, with no ability or capacity to hold as allodial (private) any land under patent, we the
subjects (citizenships) have no land to call our own. We can only use in rent and tenancy that of our
sovereign masters, and so we are charged for everything we do in the contractually granted names
and titles (property) we use to legally trespass on the state (public) lands. And so we must therefore
follow their established law of persons (legal status), the law of the vessel (person).

The worst part about the big lie is that we have been trained (educated as animals) to believe that
in actuality even we, the multitude of the lower-class populace, while acting in a public citizen-
ship, are at the same time somehow the private ÒSovereign PeopleÓ we pledge allegiance to. Yet
another group delusion of that mass of illiterates we call the general public; the common people. The
goyÉ

But how could a person be both one of the People as a sovereign and also subject to Òthe
PeopleÓ (their own selves) of government? Amazingly, this obvious paradox seems to go
unchecked and thus unexamined by that mass of illiterates who have no idea they are indeed
subjects (debt-slaves) in allegiance to a smaller group of People (a speciÞc multitude of People in
king-ship) as represented by their sovereign State (body) and its commercial state government.

The words have been altered, but their Latin (Roman) meanings have not.

There are two types of citizens in the United States. One is bound in public surety as agent for
anotherÕs property (a dummy), and one is a declared part of the ÒPosterityÓ of the original, private,
sovereign landholders, to which the public entities pledge their allegiance to, usually without
realizing they are doing so.

The difference lies simply in the matter of deÞning how, where, and why we are bornÉ

To be clear, this is not a new system, but rather more ancient than this author can state in terms of
fact. This is the corporatized system of an esoteric (private) agenda long in place and protected
under the rose (in private/secretly) by those who know and beneÞt by its artiÞce. It is a
combination (conspiracy and confederation) of religions and other sacred (cursed) aspects of
geometry and astronomy combined with such crafts as astrology and pharmacopeia (witchcraft
and poisoning, venom). But in the end, to cut it down to its most essential part, esoterica is simply

!686
 a design to keep knowledge of the tree of useless information hidden “in plain sight” so as to keep
certain men unawares of the private nature of the minority (elite), not the least of which is the
language arts explained within this work.

ESOTERIC - adjective - [Gr. interior, from within.] PRIVATE; an epithet applied to the private
instructions and doctrines of Pythagoras; OPPOSED TO EXOTERIC, OR PUBLIC.
(Webs1828)

ESOTERY - noun - MYSTERY; SECRECY. [Little used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

We must not allow our minds to wander from Reality, from that Supreme actuality and protection
of Jehovah, by placing respect upon these false mysteries of evil men and their Þctional worth,
which has no place in Nature. Their values are always false. We can no longer be fooled into
placing any Real mystical or magical connections to these groups, for their only mystery lies in the
codes and ciphers they privately create while retaining any deciphering tools and arts to them-
selves. But their trickery is always empty and without substance, cheap magic designed to inspire
false awe and marked impressions, with the main goal of misleading us all away from our Source,
away from our spiritual Self and Oneness with the Reality of Nature. Nothing under God is
actually hidden. Nothing is patented. Nothing is organized by status. And the only way to keep a
common people (goyim) in their common place and under public status (personhood) in public-
mindedness is to design a language structure (as dog-Latin) that is a similitude but never a same-
ness to its origin of source. To cause a general delusion in language comprehension is the only
secret holding such esoterica in place, for again, if the slave learns the language of its master then
the master loses that mystery that esoterically binds the mind (and thus the body) of the slave.
Thus religions and instituted patriotisms are created to promote the Þction of these esoteric
(private) practitioners of what underneath is just petty piracy.

—=—

“To live UNDER the American Constitution is the greatest POLITICAL

PRIVILEGE that was ever accorded to the HUMAN RACE.”
ÑCalvin Coolidge, 30th President of the United States (1923Ð1929)

—=—

This quote is perhaps the most revealing false truth ever spoken by a president of that United States
municipal corporation, if only we can decipher the underpinnings of esoterica used in his
language. Most slaves would cheer after hearing this quote with the proud ignorance of patriotic
fervor, believing themselves to be anything but the debt-slaves they are.



But the “human race” is not a reference to the sovereign People of each State. Mr. Coolidge is let-
ting his governed (public) slaves know that the United States citizen-ship-slave-status is merely a
political (artiÞcial) privilege (not a natural right). It is a franchise given only to the lowest of
Þctional life-forms (animals) that pledge allegiance to himself and the rest of his bloodline ÒPeopleÓ
in compact as the private States united to protect each other from all enemies, foreign and domestic
(including the general public). In short, the president is addressing the plebes of the nation, the
goyim who’s domicile allows them the franchise of freedom under contract and only civilly upon
good behavior in a state of never-ending probation. We are granted a sentence for the life of the
legal person (status). This sycophant is not to be celebrated as anything but the corporate CEO of a
commercial company holding an enslaved, totally degraded people. But apparently we have the
best slave colony of them all! Be proud!

!687
For perspective, this is like the president of McDonald’s mother corporation letting all subordinate
(franchise) stores know that they are in the greatest franchise in the Þctional realm of artiÞcial
persons. By owning a franchise corporation (artiÞcial person) that pledges total fealty, allegiance,
and of course tribute to the will of the mother corporation, this is the greatest political privilege
ever accorded the public-minded fool (hu-man). Everything is a pretext.

In deÞning just what the District of Columbia is, as the principal seat for all agents in public citizen-
ship and allegiance to it, we can read:

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - A territory situated on the Potomac river, and being the SEAT
OF GOVERNMENT of the United States. It was originally ten miles square, and was
composed of portions of Maryland and Virginia ceded by those states to the United States; but
in 1846 the tract coming from Virginia was retroceded. LEGALLY IT IS NEITHER A STATE
NOR A TERRITORY, BUT IS MADE SUBJECT, BY THE CONSTITUTION, TO THE
EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF CONGRESS. (Black2)

—=—

If the District is under congress, which means that congress is sovereign over the District, then
what in God’s name makes you think you are a sovereign entity when your domicile is inane under
that District (seizure), when your rendered persona is a legal creation (property) of that District
(Caesar/god)?

One should pay attention to how and what one pledges their allegiance to, for the pledge itself tells
us that we are obviously not that sovereign to which we pledge our allegiance to:

The Oath of Allegiance to the United States: the following is the text of the Oath of Allegiance:

I hereby declare, ON OATH, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all
allegiance and Þdelity to any foreign prince, potentate, STATE, OR SOVEREIGNTY, of
whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will SUPPORT AND
DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA against all enemies, foreign and domestic; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH
AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; that I will BEAR ARMS ON BEHALF OF THE
UNITED STATES when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in
the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; THAT I WILL PERFORM
WORK OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE under civilian direction when required by the law;
and that I TAKE THIS OBLIGATION FREELY, WITHOUT ANY MENTAL RESERVATION
OR PURPOSE OF EVASION; so help me God.”

—The ‘Oath of Allegiance,’ 8 C.F.R. (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 337 (2008)

—=—

Seriously, who in GodÕs name (literally) would take this oath in GodÕs name? Who but the most
unknowledgeable of fools would voluntarily subject themselves to an executive military force such
as this? Who, that is, that is compos mentis (of right mind)? Obviously this is a voluntary oath, done
without coercion or Òmental reservationÓ and only in the offering of some beneÞt, some false sense
of protection in exchange for subjection. In other words, they are selling status and beneÞts in ex-
change for us pledging our very Lives to protect it (Þction) as our slave-master! Is anybody actually
reading these things?

Reading between the lines here, we are literally agreeing to do whatever the legal law requires
against our own moral code. We will kill for the United States when the ÒlawÓ legally requires us to
do so under permissive license. This is insanity. But most important to note here is that this is a
voluntary (free from force) pledge and oath to the sovereignty, its established de facto

!688
governments, its legal laws, and ultimately towards its appointed (anointed) legal gods. It is a
pledge to Þght, die, and to be used (employed) forcibly for work (servitude) on behalf of the
sovereignty (Þctional state), as represented by its commercial government and ßag (Arms),
whenever the law of man requires it. Whenever the Þction requires it. This is slavery, represented in
a ßattering, patriotic formality, and garnered by voluntary consent through a legally binding
pledge. The military draft, which forces young boys (infants) to become mercenary killers in
adultery (infantry), is merely slavery reworded as public ÒselectiveÓ service. It is slavery because the
consequences of denying this obligation of citizenship and law is to be forcibly placed into
incarceration once this oath is taken. But Þrstly this is based on voluntary slavery because the
agreement to serve in the military and be drafted was agreed to before the service could happen, as
was the consequences of reneging on that agreement and oath. No moral objection will be
accepted. For no morals are required or sought after by the takers of this oath. Moral resistance is
futileÉ

But most importantly, this oath reads as a renouncement of Faith to all other Òsovereignties,Ó
including to God (Jehovah) and to any other law or state, including all of the several, individual
States in the union! It is literally a willing pledge to abandon our blood-rights by denying we are a
part of any other sovereign People. Therefore, no private citizen would ever take this oath. It is
only for plebs; for publicly minded citizen-ships of the United States. It is the cost of volunteerism;
of prostitution to the constitution as naturalized citizen-ships.

This non-religious faith in the form of a sacred (cursed) oath is further enforced and engrained into
the public-mindedness of men and especially their children within public schools, where the pledge
of allegiance is required to be chanted daily. Without comprehension of our words, we foolishly
support our own oath of fealty to that corrupt symbol of the sovereignty above us:

ÒI pledge allegiance, to the FLAG, of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC, for
which IT standsÉÓ

—=—

If we are pledging allegiance to the Republic (the private States), then we are not part of any
Republic, only its servants in fealty and ligeance. The republic spoken of is whatever State (People)
the oath is being taken in. For the United States district itself is anything but a republic.

Do not the scriptures teach never to take false idols or pledge foolish oaths in adultery? Is the ßag
not an idol? It is certainly an artiÞcial thing, a creation of man representing an artiÞcial person
(municipal corporation) and system of law created by man, and it certainly adheres to nothing of
GodÕs Law of Nature by its very own law (law of the admiralty, maritime ßag). So, is it not a graven
image?

Why in GodÕs name (literally) would you pledge an oath to a piece of cloth? Does that really make
any sense to you at all?

UnlessÉ Could it be that the word ßag carries with it a meaning that is in fact more than what
meets the eye?

The commercial (war) ßag of the United States, as will be discussed later in this work, signiÞes the
international jurisdiction of the law of nations (law of the sea) outside of the nations own
constitutional purview; placing its patrons within an interstate commercial enterprise for which we
all are the faith and credit pledged. Even as the 14th Amendment states that US citizen-ships are
citizens of both the United States in domicile and of their individual states in residence, this pledge
of allegiance veriÞes that citizenships pledge themselves to the National Flag and to the People of
each individual republic (State) for which the unionÕs municipal corporation stands in subjection.
Logically, a man never need pledge his own allegiance to himself (as one of the People), for a king
(sovereign) has no law above himself but that of GodÕs Law, if he so chooses to follow that path.
But a man of God would certainly not enslave all other men. If the common, public class of peopled

!689
(live-stocked) persons in citizenship were indeed also the sovereign class of private citizens, then
not only would almost all public and commercial governmental functions be unnecessary, there
would be no point in establishing any sovereignty at all; for no man would fall under the title of
this sovereignty that could be controlled by any legal godhead as a subject. Sovereignty is pointless
without subjects. If the entirety of the men acting in the United States of America were sovereign
(private), then no one would be a sovereign, for a sovereign must have subjects beneath him to be
legally considered as a sovereign entity. What good is a kingship with no subjects? Nations would
be pointless. Again, slavery by any other name, be it violently enforced or voluntarily consented to
and pledged in fealty and citizenship, is still under any other name just slavery.

To put this into clear terms, man should only hold one Being as the True Sovereign, which is only
God (Jehovah) and the Law of God, making man a subject only to Nature’s self-Existent and
indefatigable, permanent, and thus inescapable Law. Only by personifying Jehovah through a false
“Christ” head as a perpetual and transferable legal and ecclesiastical corporation sole and mixed
secular and artiÞcially spiritual ofÞce with ecclesiastical jurisdiction can man declare himself as a
sovereign in God’s empty “name.” Without this trickery and blasphemy of God’s name, no man
could claim such sovereignty over other men, for it is not of the Natural Design. And only by
tricking and misinforming us all into leading a non-spiritual, public life in a dead pledge to these
false gods can they also claim that they are spiritually superior over us and therefore have the
Living, God-given right to rule over the dead. This is the foundation of man’s law. Complete and
total corruption.

It is important to note here that all presidents of the United States are direct blood kin and cousins
to George Washington and to the kings of England. They are each one of the posterity of the
original constituters, and only one of the bloodline of the original and corrupt People (Posterity)
will ever be allowed to become president (C.E.O) over this sovereign government corporation. The
president is the keeper of the secrets of the State, and so appoints and conÞrms the Secretaries
(secret-keepers) of each Executive Cabinet Agency (as Secretaries of State, Commerce, Treasury,
Justice, War [as “Peace”], etc.). Blood right equates to the right of inheritance.

While this may be difÞcult to accept for most publicly minded persons reading this, those whom
actually believe in the illusion of the American dream, a simple genealogy search will verify this as a
True statement. In fact, every nation in the world is set up the same way, Israel being the most
obvious with its speciÞc blood-right of return. You will have a choice at the next election to vote
popularly (as part of the lowest class of the public population of goy considered as one body
politic, one voice, e pluribus unum) for one of two blood cousins of the Kings of Europe and of
George Washington (would-be king of America) for president, just as it always has been, for we the
indebted plebs in our servile personage and standing in a corruption of blood cannot become
president. The constitution clandestinely states this. I’ll spend no more time on this easily found
genealogical fact. But rest assured that the man posing as the corporate entity “Barack Obama” and
acting as president of the United States is not considered as the Þrst ÒblackÓ president of the United
States, but instead only as one of the usual descendants of the bloodline of “white persons”
through his mother’s family line, which is of the direct line to the “royal” blood of the constituted
posterity. He would otherwise not be able (have capacity) to the electoral approval of president.

We must not be fooled by the complexion of this man in former ofÞce, for he is certainly not the
Þrst ÒcoloredÓ president. There will never be a Truly colored president of pure ÒblackÓ or ÒnegroidÓ
blood. This word black is a word of corruption, not a word of mere color. No man is actually black
in Nature. It signiÞes, from the perspective of the blood heirs in compact of posterity, a tainted
(colored/admixed) blood by those who consider themselves to be of pure blood for political
(Þctional) purposes. And here lies the problem, for when we judge the outward appearance of a
man we fail to realize the condition of his blood by law. Even the man most white in skin-color can
potentially not qualify to have pure blood in this legal fable. And so we must know that, according
to statute, Barack Obama is indeed a “white person” by law due to his proclaimed and recorded
fabled genealogy. Nothing else matters in this legal (artful) determination of political class
structure.

!690
So then, let’s take a quick look at Obama’s pedigree, shall we? Let’s look through his skin and see
what really qualiÞes him to be president and overseer of the bloodlineÕs principal, commercial
government and its agencies.

The popular genealogy site geni.com reports the following information on the heraldry of president
Obama (A.K.A.):

President ÒBarack Obama,Ó a false name, is:



WILLIAM THE CONQUERER'S 22ND GREAT GRANDSON

Henry V, King of England's 1st cousin 19 times removed

Henry VIII, King of England's 1st cousin 16 times removed

Anne Boleyn, Queen of England's 1st cousin 15 times removed

Mary I, Queen of Scots's 3rd cousin 14 times removed
President James Madison's 3rd cousin 8 times removed

Abraham Lincoln's 7th cousin 7 times removed
President Thomas Jefferson's 10th cousin 6 times removed
President John Tyler's 10th cousin Þve times removed
Elvis Presley's 9th cousin once removed
Sarah Palin's 10th cousin
Joseph Smith Jr.Õs (Mormon FounderÕs) 10th cousin 6 times removed

—Excerpt from geni.com article entitled: “President Obama’s Cousins: Elvis, Buffett, Palin, and…
You?”

—=—

One example of his former cousins in the White House is Martin van Burin. LetÕs have a lookÉ

ÒEdward I "Longshanks," King of England is Martin Van Buren, 8th President of the USA's
17TH GREAT GRANDFATHER!”

Martin Van Buren, 8th President of the USA

  → Married Maria Van Buren, his Þrst cousin once removed, and descends from:
his mother → Jannetje Laurense Van Schaick
her mother → Jannetje Van Schaick
her mother → Hendrickje Cornellissen Van Ness
her mother → Maycke Hendrickse van der Burchgraeff
her mother → Hendrick Andriaens Van Den Burchgraeff
her father → Adriaen Anolde Van Den Burchgraeff
his father → Arnold Adriansz Van Den Burchgraeff
his father → Adriaen Arnold Burchgrave
his father → Arnold II de Burggrave
his father → Arnold I de Burchgrave
his father → Gertruydt Fire (van Grobbendonck) de Burchgrave
his mother → Arnold Brandt, heer van Ayseau en Grobbendonck
her father → Jean III Brant, seigneur d'Ayseau
his father → Jan II van Brant
his father → Johann Brant, seigneur d'Ayseau et Ochamps
his father → Jan III, hertog van Brabant
his father → Margaret of England
his mother → Edward I "Longshanks," King of England
her father
—Excerpt from (geni.com) article of the same title

—=—

!691
Still think Obama’s just a negro, just Barack from around the block? Still believe the legal nonsense
that heÕs the Þrst black dude in the Whitehouse, perhaps? A legally non-white person? DonÕt be a
fool! All presidents are of the ÒwhiteÓ (pure) bloodline. Your eyes deceive you. You see, we have
forgotten already the maxim (principle) of law, which says that legally, what is adjudged may cause
black to be white and up to be down. And that becomes the ratiÞed, conÞrmed truth in the legal
realm of Þction. Perhaps we should discover just what it is to be a white person?

WHITE PERSONS - As used in Rev. St. U.S. sect. 2169 (Naturalization Act March 26, 1790, c. 3,
1 Stat. 103, as amended by Act Feb. 18, 1875, c. 80, sect. 1, 18 Stat. 318 [8 U.S.C.A. 5 703]),
members of the white or Caucasian race, as distinct from the black, red, yellow, and brown
races. Whether applicant for United States citizenship is a "white person" eligible for
citizenship under statute enumerating classes of people eligible therefor DEPENDS, NOT
UPON ETHNOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF GROUP TO WHICH HE BELONGS, BUT
UPON WHETHER MEMBERS OF SUCH GROUP WITH CHARACTERISTICS EXISTING
IN 1790 when statute was Þrst enacted were intended by Congress TO BE CLASSIFIED AS
WHITE PERSONS. And statute uses the words "white persons" as meaning primarily the
European peoples who constituted the class from which virtually all of immigration to
United States has come and who readily become assimilated into our civilization… In the
legislation of the slave period, PERSONS WITHOUT ADMIXTURE OF COLORED BLOOD,
WHATEVER THE ACTUAL COMPLEXION MIGHT BE. See, also, White Race. In South
Africa, persons of European descent. (Black4)

WHITE PERSONS - The acts of congress which authorize the naturalization of aliens,
CONFINE THE DESCRIPTION OF SUCH ALIENS TO FREE WHITE PERSONS. 2. This of
course excludes the African race WHEN PURE, BUT IT IS NOT EASY TO SAY WHAT
SHADE OF COLOR OR MIXTURE OF BLOOD WILL MAKE A WHITE PERSON. 3. The
constitution of Pennsylvania, as amended, conÞnes the right of citizenship to free white
persons; and these words, white persons, or similar words, are used in most of the
constitutions of the southern states, IN DESCRIBING THE ELECTORS. (Bouv1856)

WHITE - ÒWhite person,Ó as used in the naturalization laws, means A PERSON of the
Caucasian race, and does not therefore include a Mongolian. BUT DOES INCLUDE ONE
NEARER WHITE THAN BLACK OR RED. In the legislation of the slave period, referred to
A PERSON WITHOUT ADMIXTURE OF COLORED BLOOD, WHATEVER THE ACTUAL
COMPLEXION MIGHT BE. See Citizen; Color, Mulatto. (WCA1889)

WHITE - A Mongolian is not a "white person," within the meaning of the term as used in the
naturalization laws of the United States; the term applies only to persons of the
CAUCASIAN RACE. (Black1)

RACE - A TRIBE, PEOPLE, OR NATION, belonging or supposed to belong TO THE SAME

STOCK OR LINEAGE. "Race, color, OR PREVIOUS CONDITION OF
SERVITUDE.Ó (Black1)

RACE - ÉDESCENT. (Black4)

DESCENT - HEREDITARY SUCCESSION. Succession to the OWNERSHIP OF AN ESTATE

BY INHERITANCE, or by any act of law, as distinguished from "purchase." Title by descent
is the title by which one person, upon the death of another, acquires the real estate of the
latter as his heir at law. (Black1)

MONGREL - adjective - [See Mingle.] OF A MIXED BREED; of different kinds. - noun - An

animal of a mixed breed. (Webs1828)

MINGLE - verb transitive - 1. TO MIX; TO BLEND; TO UNITE IN ONE BODY; as, to mingle
liquors of different kinds. 2. To mix or blend WITHOUT ORDER OR PROMISCUOUSLY.

!692
 There was Þre mingled with hail. Exodus 9:24. 3. TO COMPOUND; TO UNITE IN A MASS,
as solid substances; as, to mingle ßour, sugar and eggs in cookery. 4. TO JOIN IN MUTUAL
INTERCOURSE OR IN SOCIETY. THE HOLY SEED HAVE MINGLED THEMSELVES
WITH THE PEOPLE OF THOSE LANDS. Ezra 9:2. Psalms 106:35. 5. TO CONTAMINATE;
TO RENDER IMPURE; TO DEBASE BY MIXTURE. The best of us appear contented with a
mingled imperfect virtue. 6. TO CONFUSE. There mingle broils. - verb intransitive - To be
mixed; TO BE UNITED WITH. She, when she saw her sister nymphs, suppressed. Her rising
fears, and mingled with the rest. - noun - Mixture; medley; PROMISCUOUS MASS. [Not
used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

Regardless of complexion…

Get this through your heads! ItÕs the bloodline! ItÕs the fabled genealogy of heraldic family Arms
and how we Bear them, not the color of our skin! Being styled as a Òwhite personÓ or a ÒnegroÓ or
any other color of law is not Reality, not Natural, and not spiritual; any more than the Þctional pure
and half-blood wizards from the Harry Potter series of Þction. This is purely a legal status, a
ßattering title, based on historical records of supposed ÒroyalÓ bloodlines. The legal word color
does not mean the same as the True Colors of Nature. It can only be the legal color of law, which is
only ever as black as the ink used to fashion such artiÞcial statuses and descriptions. This is the
fabled tale of falsely (legally) sacred (cursed) blood. These are the private landholders (heirs to
fortunes and estates). These are the pirates. Then as now they stand in combined (conspired) royal
majesty over us, as rulers over the so-called ÒsovereignÓ nation and its induced and enslaved
public Òpeople.Ó The race wars are not Real, used only by these pirates (slave-holders) to pit their
subjects (voluntary slaves) against each other for better control and entertainment (to enter and hold
[tain] the mind). For when slaves Þght amongst each other, imagining one class of slave better than
the other, then no slaves are organized enough for Þghting the pirates that control them all
ÒequallyÓ under civil law.

And right on schedule, in August of 2016, we were presented our next choice of bloodline cousins
to vote (poll) for, as known and ofÞcially researched and reported:

ÒJohn of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster, married Katherine Swynford, Duchess of Lancaster, and
John and Katherine are Donald and Hillary’s shared 18th great grandparents,Ó reports
ÒExtra.Ó

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton
donÕt have much in common in terms of policy, but as for heritage, the two front-runners are
reportedly related.

According to a report from the ÒExtraÓ entertainment show, genealogists found that Trump
and Clinton are 19th cousins, sharing a common ancestor from England 18 generations ago.

Genealogy experts at Geni.com said the real estate mogul and former secretary of state are the
direct descendants of the 14th century Þrst Duke of Lancaster, John of Gaunt, and his wife
Katherine Swynford. Swynford was GauntÕs mistress but they later married and THEIR
CHILDREN WERE LEGITIMIZED, according to the Daily Mail.

ÒJohn of Gaunt, 1st Duke of Lancaster, married Katherine Swynford, Duchess of Lancaster, and
John and Katherine are Donald and Hillary’s shared 18th GREAT GRANDPARENTS,Ó
reports ÒExtra.Ó

Hillary Clinton is a descendant of one of their children, Joan Beaufort. Her brother, John
Beaufort, is an ancestor of Trump.

!693
 And it turns out that THEIR 19TH GREAT GRANDFATHER IS KING EDWARD III,
according to author A.J. Jacobs, who studied Geni’s research. “SO THERE IS A PRECEDENT
FOR RULING A COUNTRY; IT’S IN THEIR GENES,” Jacobs told the television program…

Perhaps more surprisingly, President Barack Obama and former Vice President Dick Cheney
are actually EIGHTH COUSINS, revealed Cheney’s wife Lynne in 2007 while researching her
ancestry for her memoir, reports The Hill.”

—Headlines And Global News article entitled, “Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton: Candidates Are Related, According To Genealogists,” Weds. Aug 24th,
2016

—=—

Who ran for president in 2016? It was the same damn family members that always pretend to run
against each other, dummy! ItÕs a Þxed, rigged (false) competition, you fool! Just as Þxed as the
bloodline aristocracy of any of the crown corporation kingdoms, but with just a bit more
propaganda and a whole lot more lies.

INAUGURATION - The act of installing or inducting into ofÞce with formal ceremonies, as
the coronation OF A SOVEREIGN, the inauguration of a PRESIDENT OR GOVERNOR, or
the consecration of a prelate. A word APPLIED BY THE ROMANS TO THE CEREMONY
OF DEDICATING A TEMPLE, OR RAISING A MAN TO THE PRIESTHOOD, AFTER
THE AUGURS HAD BEEN CONSULTED. (Black4)

AUGUR - To be a sign of especially good or bad things in the future. (Cambridge Dictionary
Online)

AUGUR - noun - [Latin augur. The Þrst syllable is from avis, a fowl; but the meaning and origin
of the last syllable are not obvious.] 1. Among the Romans, an ofÞcer whose duty was to
foretell future events by the singing, chattering, ßight and feeding of birds. There was a
college or community of augers, originally three in number, and afterwards nine, four
patricians, and Þve plebeians. They bore a staff or wand, and were held in great respect. 2.
ONE WHO PRETENDS TO FORETELL FUTURE EVENTS BY OMENS… - verb intransitive -
TO GUESS; TO CONJECTURE BY SIGNS OR OMENS; TO PROGNOSTICATE. - verb
transitive - TO PREDICT OR FORETELL; as, to augur ill success. (Webs1828)

OMEN - noun - [Latin omen; Hebrew, AN AUGUR.] A SIGN OR INDICATION OF SOME

FUTURE EVENT; A PROGNOSTIC. Superstition and ignorance multiply omens;
PHILOSOPHY AND TRUTH REJECT ALL OMENS, except such as may be called causes of
the events. WITHOUT A MIRACLE, HOW CAN ONE EVENT BE THE OMEN OF
ANOTHER WITH WHICH IT HAS NO CONNECTION? (Webs1828)

—=—


The augur is also called as a soothsayer, enchanter, fortuneteller, and a practitioner of divination
(from Strong's H5172 - nachash), ranking up there in sin with sorcerer and necromancer.

“The augur was A PRIEST AND OFFICIAL IN THE CLASSICAL ROMAN WORLD. His
main role was the practice of augury, INTERPRETING THE WILL OF THE GODS by
studying the ßight of birds: whether they are ßying in groups or alone, what noises they
make as they ßy, direction of ßight and what kind of birds they are. This was known as
"TAKING THE AUSPICES." The ceremony and function of the augur was CENTRAL TO
ANY MAJOR UNDERTAKING IN ROMAN SOCIETY—PUBLIC OR PRIVATE—including
matters of WAR, COMMERCE, AND RELIGION…”

“The Roman historian Livy stresses the importance of the augurs: "Who does not know that
this city was founded only after taking the auspices, THAT EVERYTHING IN WAR AND

!694
 IN PEACE, AT HOME AND ABROAD, WAS DONE ONLY AFTER TAKING THE
AUSPICES?…”

“Augury sought the divine will regarding any proposed course of action which might affect
Rome's pax, fortuna and salus (peace, good fortune and wellbeing). POLITICAL, MILITARY
AND CIVIL ACTIONS WERE SANCTIONED BY AUGURY, HISTORICALLY
PERFORMED BY PRIESTS OF THE COLLEGE OF AUGURS and by haruspices ON
BEHALF OF SENIOR MAGISTRATES. The presiding magistrate at an augural rite thus held
the “right of augury” (ius augurii). Magistracies (which included senior military and civil
ranks) were therefore RELIGIOUS OFFICES IN THEIR OWN RIGHT, and magistrates
were directly responsible for the pax, fortuna and salus of Rome and everything that was
Roman.”



—Excerpt from sourced Wikipedia entry for ‘Augur’

—=—

The author will leave the reader to contemplate just which appointed positions in the president’s
(magistrate’s) Cabinet resemble what are the modern versions of those ancient Romish augurs. And
isn’t it funny that the pax, fortuna, and salus (peace, good fortune of the economy, and wellbeing of
the Þctional nation/person) of the United States district is told in the traditional soothsaying
ceremony and prognostication of the ÒState of the Union AddressÓ each year?

—=—

“Hope and Change.”

—Example of empty, unattached or meaningless augury (divination) used in campaign platform for ‘Barack Obama for president’

—=—

Since the president of the United States as well as its congress or judiciary cannot legislate hope, and
since the backbone of government and the economy is in fact and always has been constant change,
this particular slogan falls into the realm of fallacious rhetoric Þt only for the most devious
scumbaggery. And the common, public-minded multitude grabbed on to that tweet of hope and
change and sucked it all the way into 2017, when the next bloodline candidate and cousin of Obama
and Hillary Clinton was inaugurated on basically the same augury of an empty platform of hope
and change that will somehow “make America great again.”

For accuracy, the lowest and most devious and of course non-scriptural, commercial form of the
maxims of law warns us, as if the devil itself wrote it as such, that:

—=—

“A thing adjudged MAKES WHAT WAS WHITE, BLACK; WHAT WAS

BLACK, WHITE; WHAT WAS CROOKED STRAIGHT; WHAT WAS
STRAIGHT, CROOKED.”
—Res judicata facit ex albo nigrum, ex nigro album, ex curvo rectum, ex recto curvum. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“A thing adjudged MUST BE TAKEN FOR TRUTH.”

—Res judicata pro veritate accipitur. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

!695
So what is truth in the world of an anything-goes legal Þction? Can artiÞce ever actually be
anything in Truth (Nature)?

Of course notÉ We might as well still use augurs to track bird ßight patterns and signs!

When the Bible tells us pretend to be Òno thing,Ó it is telling us how to avoid being adjudged as
some thing we are not.

Barack Obama appears (prima facie) to be Òblack,Ó and that is what our rulers wish us to continue
believing through propaganda and public-minded idiocracy. But the law declares his bloodline as
being clearly that of a Òwhite person.Ó We must never adjudge the outward appearance or image of
anything in Nature, except to distinguish what is self-evident and self-Existent compared to what is
of artiÞce, to what is no thing at all in GodÕs Nature. ÒWhite persons,Ó of course, donÕt actually
Exist in Nature, only as a legal art form without substance. The word ÒwhiteÓ doesnÕt Exist in
Nature. No one is born a Òwhite person,Ó for no man is born a person (status) in Nature. There is no
status under Jehovah. Persons are only created (birthed) from words through devilry, by doctors,
attorneys, and scribes. These are just words, and words are not the Creator of man. Only the false,
Þctional persona of any man is a Òwhite personÓ in law. No actual color Exists in the legal Þction,
either. These are all terms of art, after all.

So riddle me this: exactly what color is a word? How can blood actually be Òwhite,Ó and how can a
person (Þctionalized legal status made exclusively from artful legal words) have blood?

Now can we see the problem with the literalist stylings of dog-Latin that causes such an unwitting
illiteracy in us all?

—=—

ÒIt should be noted that Americans whose ancestors came from continental
Europe in the colonial period and the 19th Century are UNLIKELY to
easily delineate descent from Charlemagne in their background. THERE
WAS A SEPARATION OF CLASSES IN EUROPE AND THE BLOOD OF
THE RULERS SELDOM FLOWED LEGITIMATELY INTO THE BLOOD
OF THE NOBILITY AND COMMONERSÉÓ
—Jewels of the Crown, “A newsletter of the Order of the Crown of Charlemagne in the United States of America”

—=—

Most of us are fairly impressed with ourselves when we discover a random link to some president
or famous person in the history of our family tree, foolishly ßattering ourselves that this makes us
suddenly better or at least different men because of that fabled genealogy. But let us never forget
that we are to be judged by our works, not by our persons and ßattering titles, and certainly not by
such useless information of any fruit from the tree of conceptual, useless knowledge. Just as our
actions in any legal persona are in-deed and self-evidently our own, they are equally our own
despite our relations to any sacred (cursed) ancestors, which are no doubt given more or less credit
than any man deserves by the legend-building scribes of those proscribed victors of civil history.
And yet, very few of us may claim to be the ÒlegitimateÓ bloodline posterity of one of ÒWe, the
PeopleÓ of the bloodline posterity of George Washington and his royal founding bloodline cousins
of that royal masonic estate. This means that very few of us can ever claim that the constitution was
written for us, and certainly not while still acting agenticly as the proprietary pirate booty we
currently stand dis-eased as. Most of us simply are not those legitimately descending heirs of Òthe
PeopleÓ of the Crown. And if we are, that legitimacy was pretended to be stolen from our family
line at the public (legal) birth of a strawman with our own legal name.

!696
Surely no reasonable man could still believe in that American dream that we can become anything
we want to be, even president! Sorry, but all or most of the ofÞces of those prominent Actors,
CEO’s, presidents, vice-presidents, prime ministers, senators, Supreme justices, popes, kings and
queens are already spoken for by one of them. For that is the legal (anti-God) design. These are only
ofÞces, masks (personas) in Þction, and through their corporate government they own the titles to
those ofÞces, just as the title of queen belongs not to the man but to the crown corporation.
Commoners can’t be president, or for that matter be allowed to gain much power or public
audience at all.

If the reader is familiar with my previous works, writings, and documentaries on the CAFR system
(The Corporation Nation, The Great Pension Fund Hoax, etc.), and as another book I hope to compile in
the future, the reader may understand this to be True not because of some involved conspiracy
theory, but because I have shown through primary-source documentation governments to be the
main shareholder in all major and most minor corporations around the world, showing their
collective stranglehold upon all industries from media to food and water to education to war. And
through proxy voting under majority shareholder powers, government through its established
private associations (artiÞcial persons) issues its own consensus as to the totality of corporate
governance via its collective proxy shareholder votes. In other words, government votes to elect the
boards of directors and decides on mergers and acquisitions for each corporation it holds stock in,
not through statue or government bureaucracy, but though shareholder votes inside those
corporations. To ask why this information is not “common knowledge” is a sign of the disease of
public-mindedness. It’s a stupid question. The media, for all intents and purposes, is owned by
government through stock investment! I will not ask the reader to take my word on this, but rather
to seek out my documentary Þlms and the multitude of primary-source articles I have written on
the subject. And perhaps someday I shall endeavor to put it all into a book form, should I Live that
long despite this current, diminishing, false paradigm of freedom (franchise).

Read the following carefully, applying it to our current system and organization of the US
government…

BURG, BURGH - A term anciently applied to a castle or fortiÞed place; A BOROUGH (q.v.).
(Black4)

BURGH - A BOROUGH; (q. v.) a castle or TOWN. (Bouv1856)

BURGAGE - English law. A species of tenure in socage; it is where the king OR OTHER
PERSON IS LORD OF AN ANCIENT BOROUGH, IN WHICH THE TENEMENTS ARE
HELD BY A RENT CERTAIN. (Bouv1856)

BURGESS - A magistrate of a borough; generally, THE CHIEF OFFICER OF THE

CORPORATION, who performs, within the borough, THE SAME KIND OF DUTIES
WHICH A MAYOR DOES IN A CITY. In England, the word is sometimes applied to ALL
THE INHABITANTS OF A BOROUGH, who are called burgesses, sometimes it signiÞes
THE REPRESENTATIVES OF A BOROUGH in parliament. (Bouv1856)

BUREAU - A French word, which literally means a large writing table. It is used
FIGURATIVELY FOR THE PLACE WHERE BUSINESS IS TRANSACTED: it has been
borrowed by us, and used in nearly the same sense; as, the bureau of the secretary of state.
(Bouv1856)

BUREAU - An ofÞce for the transaction of business. A name given to THE SEVERAL
DEPARTMENTS OF THE EXECUTIVE OR ADMINISTRATIVE BRANCH OF
GOVERNMENT, or their divisions. As applied to a division of an administrative
department, the term may include the operating force. (Black4)

CRACY - Word-forming element forming nouns meaning “rule or government by”… (—

Etymology Dictionary Online by Douglas Harper)

!697
 BUREAUCRACY - A system in which THE BUSINESS OF GOVERNMENT IS CARRIED
ON IN DEPARTMENTS, EACH UNDER THE CONTROL OF A CHIEF, in contradistinction
from a system in which the ofÞcers of government have a co-ordinate authority. (Black4)

BUREAUCRACY - The ABUSE OF OFFICIAL INFLUENCE IN THE AFFAIRS OF

GOVERNMENT; CORRUPTION. This word has lately been adopted to signify that those
persons who are employed in bureaus ABUSE THEIR AUTHORITY BY INTRIGUE TO
PROMOTE THEIR OWN BENEFIT, OR THAT OF FRIENDS, RATHER THAN THE
PUBLIC GOOD. The word is derived from the French. (Bouv1856)

BUREAUCRAT - An ofÞcial who WORKS BY FIXED ROUTINE WITHOUT EXERCISING

INTELLIGENT JUDGMENT. (–Random House Dictionary)

—=—

Oh the horror! We are stuck in a democracy headed by a bureaucracy that governs an idiocracyÉ

But donÕt let this get you down. You have to remember, you are a volunteer in their system of
subjection. There is no gun to your head. You can quit any time, that is, if you Þgure out the game
and how to Þnish it. But for most, we have no idea we are even playing a game in the Þrst place, for
its rules and commercial functionality has been normalized into what we call in our spiritual death
as making a living.You donÕt have to worship their bloodline any more than they are forced to
despise yours. For to them, your blood is non-existent and in attainder (corruption). You need not
pay tribute and taxation in extortion to them any longer, that is, unless you continue to operate in
their proprietary vessel, their legal person (status), and keep using their legal beneÞts and values in
currencies. Most will do just that. I seek to reach only the incorruptible remainder with these
works, those who want to come out of this legal matrix of lies. DonÕt blame anyone but yourself, for
this choice is laid out in the very foundation of the unenforceable common law Ñ the Bible. They
are gods (magistrates) of their own created system (bureaucracy), just as Jehovah is God over All
that is not built upon their artiÞce and Þctional property. The choice is up to you and no one else.
And nothing, my fellow servant in volunteerism, could be more self-evident than that!

We can never trust our senses when Þction rules over our Law, over our Nature. What is Real is
what is moral and unblemished by legal marks, numbers (per capita), names, and titles. Our eyes
cannot ever really see and our ears cannot hear the meanings of these empty words of art. By
taking this false oath to the artiÞcial person that is the corporate United States, we are agreeing to
these types of corrupting foundational principles (maxims) of law, where anything can be colored,
tainted, or twisted into anything else and then ofÞcially conÞrmed, ratiÞed, and legally called as
the Òtruth,Ó for that which is being considered and altered is simply not Real. In the Þction, truth is
a noun, an empty name with no referential to Nature. After all, the laws of the cartoon world are
without bounds, and anything can happen in Þction! I cannot stress this fact enough, for to accept a
place (juris-diction) in such a corrupt city upon a hill (district) is to assent to the worst potentiality
of tyranny.

While this all may be surprising due to its somewhat private mystery as kept amongst those
several People of the conspiracy (confederation), it is nonetheless par for the presidential course.
All presidents are blood relations to each other, as are all kings, prime ministers, and popes. Only a
fool, or a nation of publicly educated fools, could possibly believe otherwise. The records are out
there for the reader to verify, but only for those who actually wish to face Reality. Many donÕt.

Welcome to AmericaÉ Here lays Rome on steroids!

In anthropology, there are only three older classiÞcations of man, all of which are considered as
homo sapient beings in their purely animal (hu-man) form. These include:

!698
 Caucasian races (Aryans, Hamites, Semites)

Mongolian races (northern Mongolian, Chinese and Indo-Chinese, Japanese and Korean,
Tibetan, Malayan, Polynesian, Maori, Micronesian, Eskimo, American Indian)

Negroid races (African, Hottentots, Melanesians/Papua, “Negrito,” Australian Aborigine,

Dravidians, Sinhalese)

—=—

This is merely a scientiÞc outlook and classiÞcation, having nothing to do with politics in and of
itself. It could just as easily be butterßies or beetles so classiÞed. It is not a judgement, being
completely neutral by its surface intent. But the words themselves may certainly be used in
judgement by unscrupulous men, namely men like those “founding fathers,” those legally self-
declared Òwhite personsÓ we so mistakingly cherish as moral men. But remember, it is the blood
that is Òwhite,Ó not the skin. Notice too that the ÒSemiteÓ (i.e., the apparent, self-proclaimed ÒJewÓ)
is also considered a caucasian (and legally white) “race,” right next and equal to the Aryan!

Perhaps most interesting is that all dictionaries deÞne the word semite not as a ÒJewÓ but as an
ÒArab,Ó the connection to the modern ÒJewÓ being merely an ethnicity (language of national
identity) based on use of the Hebrew language.

SEMITE - 1a: A member of any of a number of peoples of ancient southwestern Asia

including the Akkadians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, AND ARABS… (—Webster’s English
Dictionary online)

SEMITE - A member of the group of CAUCASOID PEOPLES WHO SPEAK A SEMITIC

LANGUAGE, INCLUDING THE JEWS AND ARABS as well as the ancient Babylonians,
Assyrians, and Phoenicians… (—Collins English Dictionary online)

—=—

Even the Encyclopedia Judaica admits openly as to this description of the origin of the “Semites,”
where it states:

—=—

“Semites, a term originally referring to those peoples listed in the table

of nations (Genesis 10) as descendants of Noah’s son Shem (Sem in the
LXX and the Vulgate). THE DERIVATIVE “SEMITE” WAS COINED as
a linguistic term by A. L. Schloezer IN 1781É Shem is given Þve sons
who had 21 descendants making a total of 26 peoples derived from him.
These include the Elamites and the Assyrians, the Lydians (but note
Genesis 10:13), the Arameans, AND NUMEROUS ARAB TRIBES
THROUGH SYRIA AND ASSYRIA, TO PERSIA… “Semite” was then
deÞned by the supposed physical characteristics of the chief surviving
representatives of the list, THE JEWS AND THE ARABS… The
problematic nature and EVIL results of earlier radical theories have led
to A RESTRICTION OF THE TERMS SEMITE AND SEMITIC IN
CAREFUL MODERN USAGE TO LINGUISTIC CATEGORIES. Aside

!699
 from the Biblical referent, the linguistic is the only model scholarly-
scientiÞc use of the term. The combination of peoples under the rubric
Semites in Genesis 10 is not justiÞed by the criterionÉ These common
features comprise the IDENTIFYING MARKS OF THE SEMITIC
LANGUAGES, and in current usage THE PEOPLE SPEAKING THE
LANGUAGES ARE CALLED SEMITIC — today mainly THE JEWS
(HEBREW) AND ARABSÉ
—Encyclopedia Judaica, entry for “SEMITES,” (page 1147 of volume 14) published 1971, Jerusalem, Israel

—=—

In other words, the use of the accusation “antisemite” as a tool to defeat any rational, political
debate is a pure and utter nonsensical logical fallacy. To call anyone “antisemite” is to also call them
anti-Arab. And if indeed this semitic ethnic (language-based) title extends even to Persia, as
according to Encyclopedia Judaica, then this scientiÞc term is completely irrelevant in the way it is
modernly used as a political weapon (word-magic), as those who support Iran and other Arab
peoples and countries are also called as somehow antisemitic. So I guess we are supposed to ignore
the deep and rich semitic nature of the Iranian (Persian) and other Arab peoples so that the
synagogue of satan (false, modern, atheistic and secularized “Jews”) can lay exclusivity to that
fallacious and purposefully incorrect political term? And perhaps most hilarious, the word semite
is used to describe the Caucasiod (Caucasian) races above, which again are Aryan (Japheth?),
Semite (Shem), and Hamite (Ham). It appears that the so-called race war between Jews, Arabs, and
Christians is a non sequitur, a non-starter, as we are all really just Caucasian! One has to laugh at
the idiocy of the common goy to be led into battle against our own racial cousins due to skin-color
and cultural ethnicity (a nation and its language identity), and then further biased on which false
transliteration of religion (simulation/simulacrum) each culture subscribes to. And all the while the
very sacred texts that all these religions are stemmed from promotes Love, Peace, Charity, and
Natural Law. The irony that all three of the currently waring peoples of mainstream signiÞcance are
of the same anthropological classiÞcation, separated only by the mis-transliterated mysteries of
religious dogma and common language, while all others are sidelined and called as the “third
world” populations, stems not from accident but through careful planning by the ruling class. It is
this author’s humble opinion that only through this false, racial division (political racism) as
supported by the language (ethnicity) differential between each racially driven religious identity
may one “royal” legal class (status) rule over the rest. Without racial divisions based on lingual
(ethnic) differences that lead ultimately to cultural (cult belief) differences, the multitude of One
common people of Earth would combine under God’s Law of Nature to defeat those organized
pirates that rule by the inßuence of technology (art) and the word-magic of legal language of
government (mind control). No man may be One with God and Nature and also be a subject of any
nation and its language arts and law. It is an eternal, devilish game of divide and conquer, where
even those of “equal rights” remain ignorantly divided by their skin color and religious beliefs
(love of ceremonial falsehoods and institutionalized lies).

I cannot stress enough here the importance of understanding that language as words of art are the
single and only actual differential that makes up each ethnic culture around the world. And each of
these common tongues is shadowed by the evils of legalese, the adversary of the law society of
these devils (evil genius/class). And each is used experimentally in empire-building, driven
culturally and ethnically (by the art of language and of mammon) toward its ultimate doom while
the bloodlines (creators) never change, like the phoenix raising from its own ashes.

These group classes have certainly been used to distinguish in private law between the races, and
speciÞcally to exclude one or both from the other class and genius for their own Òposterity,Ó even
as the so-called “right of return” to Israel, based on blood right. Again, one is Reality and one is

!700
legal Þction, as fabled genealogy, the blood right of kings (sovereign Peoples). And in African
countries we will Þnd ÒblackÓ kings and aristocracies that exclude ÒwhiteÓ peoples, as would be
expected in a bloodline family rule that strives to keep its bloodline pure of the other gene pools.
For in the legal, fabled genealogical setting, we must remember that only the blood is considered,
not merely the vulgar, outward characteristics of skin-color. This is the difference between
institutionalized Þction and True science. And because of this Þction, the True science is also
mistakenly demonized as Òracist,Ó which of course is patently ridiculous; as ridiculous as blaming
the Bible for the actions of the false churches that use it wrongly in practice towards their own
designs. But from these group names we may certainly see where such exclusionary racism and the
terms surrounding it stems from.

For our purposes though, only the caucasoid race, which includes Semites and is not dependent
upon skin color alone, is our primary concern as to where the bloodline of Barack Obama stands.
His mother is of course caucasian and Jewish (ÒsemiteÓ), standing as an issue from the Dunham
clan of private, land-holding Òwhite persons,Ó or so we are told in that fabled tree of Arms.
Whatever is shown on any legal document, birth certiÞcate, or other identiÞcation means
absolutely nothing in regard to this mans blood right to occupy the ofÞce of president.

A citizen-ship is a commercial person, a vessel in receivership by man to sail on the virtual sea of
interstate commerce under the international law merchant in protection from the foreign laws of
the individual States (bloodline People). It has nothing to do with blood accept that it signiÞes the
legal ÒfactÓ that its bearer stands with a lack of inheritable blood as his lesser, lower-class status. He
is human capital, a permanent renter and tenant, mere peopled live-stock. Federal law trumps state
law only because of the higher authority of a federal citizen-ship due to domicile (dominion), just
as the laws of other foreign nations are considered as higher when a citizen of another nation or
country breaks a foreign law (as with diplomatic immunity). The offending citizen is generally
extradited back to his correct jurisdiction, or he his held as a political prisoner. Ironically, the laws
of a foreign nation only apply to the US citizen-ship by nature of that commercial relation. Without
this legal persona, the foreign nation would deal with the man according to its own moral or
amoral law and legal code. This slavery and the privilege of commercial, international travel is
mistaken to be a good thing by citizenships, for it is the security of protection, and thus in Reality is
only subjection to tyranny. It is only the modern version of travel by air and boat that creates this
apparent need for protection, for a private man seldom need leave his own perfect title to land (his
own sovereign castle). The enticement of world travel, like love is to marriage, is merely an
inducement to contract. TrickeryÉ No reasonable man would give up liberty in his own land just
to go see the Wall of China for a day with artful security and insurance in mammon. Travel is
nothing more than a quite modern, commercial inducement to contract.

Citizenship, of course, as a form of personhood, is a crime against Nature. It is a state of artiÞcial,

legal existence bound to international admiralty law, the human trafÞcking laws of that worldwide
system of mammon under an international bloodline of families. A virtual (artiÞcial) ship only sails
on virtual (artiÞcial) water, and never touches the physical land (soil) or real liquid.

CITIZEN - noun - 1. The native of a city, or an inhabitant who enjoys the freedom and
privileges OF THE CITY IN WHICH HE RESIDES; the freeman of a city, AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM A FOREIGNER, or one not entitled to its FRANCHISESÉ
(Webs1828)

CITIZENSHIP - noun - The state of being VESTED with the rights and privileges OF A
CITIZEN. (Webs1828)

SHIP - As a termination, denotes STATE OR OFFICE; as in lordship. [See Shape.] - noun -

[Latin scapha; from the root of shape.] In a general sense, a VESSEL or building of a peculiar
structure, ADAPTED TO NAVIGATION, or ßoating on water by means of sailsÉ Ships are
of various sizes and are for various uses; most of them however fall under the denomination of
ships of war and merchant's ships. - verb transitive - 1. TO PUT ON board of a ship or vessel

!701
 OF ANY KIND; as, to ship goods at Liverpoll for New York. 2. To transport in a ship; TO
CONVEY BY WATER. The sun shall no sooner the mountains touch, But we will ship him
hence. Shak. 3. To RECEIVE into a ship or vessel; as, to ship at sea. To ship the oars, to place
them in the rowlocks. To ship off, to send away by water; as, to ship off convicts. (Webs1828)



FOREIGN - Belonging to another nation or country; BELONGING OR ATTACHED TO
ANOTHER JURISDICTION; made, done, or RENDERED in another state or jurisdiction;
SUBJECT to another jurisdiction; OPERATING or SOLVABLE in another territory; extrinsic;
outside; extraordinary. NONRESIDENT. (Black2)

FOREIGNER - noun - for’aner. A PERSON BORN IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY, or without

the country or jurisdiction of which one SPEAKS. A Spaniard is a foreigner in France and
England. All men not born in the United States are to them foreigners, and they are aliens
till naturalized. A NATURALIZED PERSON IS A CITIZEN; BUT WE STILL CALL HIM A
FOREIGNER BY BIRTH. (Webs1828)

FOREIGNER - In old English law, this term, when used with reference to a particular city,
designated any person who was not an inhabitant of that city. According to later usage, it
denotes a person who is not a citizen or subject of the state or country of which mention is
made, OR ANY ONE OWING ALLEGIANCE TO A FOREIGN STATE OR SOVEREIGN.
(Black4)

FOREIGN COURTS - The courts of a foreign state or nation. In the United States, this term
is frequently applied to THE COURTS OF ONE OF THE STATES when their judgments or
records are introduced in the courts of another. (Black4)

FOREIGN LAWS - The laws of a foreign country, OR OF A SISTER STATE. Foreign laws are
often the suggesting occasions of changes in, or additions to, our own laws, and in that respect
are called "jus receptum.” (Black4)

FOREIGN TRADE - Commercial interchange of commodities from different countries;

export and import trade. (Black4)

MARIGENOUS - adjective - [Latin mare, THE SEA, and gigno, TO PRODUCE.] PRODUCED
IN OR BY THE SEA. (Webs1828)

AMERICANIZE - verb transitive - TO RENDER AMERICAN; to NATURALIZE in America.

(Webs1828)

—=—

Legal marriage is always a commercial sea contract. Remember that! And this includes the
marriage of the christian-name and surname to create the strawman.

A public United States person represents a man standing in receivership of that beneÞt and who is
thus bound in surety by the laws of the use of that public person. By operating that United States
(Washington DC) person in any of the private States of the People and under their commercial state
and municipal governments, all trade is foreign in nature, for domiciled US citizenships are
foreigners in whatever state they merely temporarily reside in. The citizenship is under United
States law, which trumps any state law opposed to it, though still being bound by both forms of
commercial law. The state governments have normalized and agreed to instate federal law in their
own legal governments, but only unto those foreign citizenships of the United States. The private
People are not in any way bound under the public law of that District, for their person (status) is
not rendered from it (from Caesar). The private People of each State are not under that public law
of each of their own created governments, which are created only to govern the commercial
transactions of foreigners. This is why, though “marijuana” may be legal in many of the several

!702
states, a public (federal) US citizen will still be considered as committing a federal offense by
possessing it. Remember, all federal crimes are monetary. And this is why the individual private
state government laws don’t protect the public user standing in a US citizen-ship, for the federal
currency is not created or administrated by any individual state, only by the federal district and its
Federal Reserve corporation. The law of the principal overrules the law of the third party in any
agency relationship. Quite obviously, the US law controls a US person, for it is the creator of that
legal status. After all, the use of United States’ notes in trade for marijuana is certainly against the
law of the creator of that currency, and a federal public person would always be considered as
acting in interstate commerce under any transaction involving currency created by the United
States. This is the price of usury and of worshiping false idols (the gods of the nations). The crime is
not medicinal or recreational “use” of a plant, the crime is acquiring of a legalized “drug” with the
use of patented money without license from the creator of that currency. Nothing of Nature is
unlawful. Only manmade things are regulated as such. And unfortunately, as US citizen-ships, the
very names (nouns) legally placed upon all things in Nature are the legal currency of words. We
may only use the words in person with permission, which means that a legal, public person may
only use Nature and worship Jehovah with license from government (anti-God). The man is bound
and gagged from his God by that legal persona, for his own surname in admixture and surety
under letters patent belongs to the state as well.

The addiction to money is inÞnitely more powerful than to any drug or plant (hint: cannabis is not
a drug, it’s a plant. Only its legal name is illegal, and only for public citizenships, not private men).

A man who receives a vessel is in receivership, and becomes the voluntarist master of that vessel in
agency.

RECEIVE - To take into possession and control; accept custody of. (Black4)

RECEIVER - noun - 1. One who takes or receives in ANY manner. 2. An ofÞcer appointed to
receive public money; a treasurer. 3. One who takes stolen goods from a thief, knowing
them to be stolen, AND INCURS THE GUILT OF PARTAKING IN THE CRIME. 4. A
VESSEL for receiving and containing the product of distillation. 5. The vessel of an air
pump, for containing the thing on which an experiment is to be made. 6. ONE WHO
PARTAKES OF THE SACRAMENT. (Webs1828)

SACRAMENT - noun - [Latin sacramentum, AN OATH, from sacer, sacred.] 1. Among ancient
christian writers, A MYSTERY. [Not in use.] 2. AN OATH; A CEREMONY PRODUCING AN
OBLIGATION; but not used in this general sense. 3. In present usage, an outward and visible
sign of inward and spiritual grace; or more particularly, a solemn religious ceremony
enjoined by Christ, THE HEAD OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, to be observed by his
followers, BY WHICH THEIR SPECIAL RELATION TO HIM IS CREATED, or their
OBLIGATIONS to him renewed and RATIFIED. Thus BAPTISM IS CALLED A
SACRAMENT for by it PERSONS are separated from the world, brought into Christ's
visible church, and LAID under particular obligations to obey his precepts. The eucharist or
communion of the Lord's supper, is also a sacrament for by COMMEMORATING THE
DEATH and dying love of Christ, christians avow their special relation to him, and renew
their obligations to be faithful to their divine Master. When we use sacrament without any
qualifying word, we mean by it: 4. The eucharist or Lord's supper. - verb transitive - TO BIND
BY AN OATH. (Webs1828)

EUCHARIST - noun - [Gr. a giving of thanks; well, favor.] 1. The sacrament of the Lord's
supper; the solemn act or ceremony of COMMEMORATING THE DEATH of our Redeemer,
in the use of bread and wine, as emblems of his ßesh and blood, accompanied with
appropriate prayers and hymns. 2. The act of giving thanks. (Webs1828)

—=—

!703
Read the above deÞnition carefully. This is a ceremony of pomp and circumstance that has nothing
to do with the scriptures, only with that of the doctrines and traditions of the corporate church. For
this is the sacrament of the church and oath to its doctrines, not to Jehovah.

—=—

“Article XXIX: Of the Wicked which do not eat the Body of Christ in the
use of the Lord's Supper…”

“The Wicked, and such as be void of a lively faith, although they do

carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as Saint Augustine saith) the
Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, YET IN NO WISE ARE
THEY PARTAKERS OF CHRIST: but rather, TO THEIR
CONDEMNATION, do eat and drink the SIGN or Sacrament of so great
a thing.”
—Article 29 of the “39 Articles of Religion (Faith)” of the Church of England, 1563

—=—

This simulation of the LordÕs Supper, called as communion, is the sacrament (curse) of the corporate
ofÞce of the pope, not a spiritual vow to Jehovah. This is the receiving of an unspiritual, vicarious
secular token, an artiÞce of a processed artiÞcial food substance in wafer form combined with a sip
of homogenized, pasteurized, very likely irradiated Ògrape juiceÓ processed with corn syrup, and is
a mockery of the True meaning of christÕs metaphoric blood offering to all of us from this legally
declared spiritual jurisdiction of the Holy Roman Empire. It is, of course, the worship of symbolism
and simulation instead of the Real Thing. An oath is not a promise, and is nothing if not a legally
binding contractual relationship under legal sanction, whereas` a private promise or vow to God is
the only Truth of Faith. Any temporal sacrament is only an oath (noun) to a corporation and its
head, as a ceremony of allegiance and fealty to the personiÞed, Þctional representation and false
legal title of the Òvicar of christÓ appointed by other men, not a promise (verb) to Jehovah. This is
how men are tricked into taking GodÕs name (as Jehovah) in vain, by instead taking the worldly
name of the antichrist (vicar of God and christ) as christÕs replacement in the temporal realm.
Spirituality dies the second any oath (sacrament) is taken, for a promise to a Þctional person, place,
or thing (noun) is always a cursed transaction in the Þction and commerce of mammon. An oath to
Jehovah is worthless to Jehovah, for man is already the property of GodÕs Creation and no false
persona is needed. Spirituality Lives only in the promises (vows) made without oath or legal con-
tract, which are those made privately and only to Jehovah through the actions of christÕs parabolic
example and with conscious awareness and intent. One cannot take an oath or make promise to
God while in pursuit of mammon, and one cannot pray to God to obtain the currency of mammon
with any legitimacy. For this is not of the realm of the Reality and Nature of God. Spirituality relies
solely on keeping the promise to follow GodÕs Law over all others, which necessarily means never
respecting that law of any man-made, institutionalized church. There can be no middleman be-
tween man and his Creator, as the scriptures instruct.

But try telling that to the pope and queen! Off with your head!

The churches and states of men stand and can only ever stand in offense against christÕs teachings,
seeking to sever manÕs connection with his own True Nature of Source, seeking to draw the
worship and energy of GodÕs Nature into the transmuted authority of those institutional Þctions.

We are either in receipt of GodÕs grace or we are standing in the dis-grace of legal, false idols.

!704
 RECEIVER - An indifferent PERSON BETWEEN THE PARTIES TO A CAUSE, appointed
by the court to receive and preserve the property or fund in litigation, and receive its rents,
ISSUES, and proÞts, AND APPLY OR DISPOSE OF THEM AT THE DIRECTION OF THE
COURT when it does not seem reasonable that either party should hold them. Or where a
party is incompetent to do so, as in the case of an INFANT. The remedy of the appointment
of a receiver is one of the very oldest in the court of chancery, and is founded on the
inadequacy of the remedy to be obtained in the court of ordinary jurisdiction. A Þduciary of
the court, appointed as an incident to other proceedings wherein certain ultimate relief is
prayed. He is a trustee or ministerial ofÞcer representing court, and all parties in interest in
litigation, and property or fund intrusted to him. See also… Receivership. ONE WHO
RECEIVES MONEY TO THE USE OF ANOTHER TO RENDER AN ACCOUNT. In criminal
law. ONE WHO RECEIVES STOLEN GOODS FROM THIEVES, AND CONCEALS THEM.
THIS WAS ALWAYS THE PREVALENT SENSE OF THE WORD IN THE COMMON AS
WELL AS THE CIVIL LAW. (Black4)

RECEIVERSHIP - An extraordinary remedy of an ancillary character; chief reason for its

allowance being TO HUSBAND PROPERTY in litigation for beneÞt OF PERSON who may
ultimately be found entitled thereto. See, also, Receiver. (Black4)

RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS - The short name usually given to the offense of receiving
any property with the knowledge that it has been feloniously, or unlawfully stolen, taken,
extorted, OBTAINED, embezzled, or disposed of. (Black4)

RECEIVER'S CERTIFICATE - A non-negotiable EVIDENCE OF DEBT, or debenture, issued

by authority of a court of chancery, as a Þrst lien upon the property of a debtor corporation in
the hands of a receiver. (Black4)

RECEIPT - Written acknowledgment of the receipt of money, or a thing of value, without

containing any afÞrmative obligation upon either party to it; A MERE ADMISSION OF A
FACT, IN WRITING. And being a mere acknowledgment of payment, is subject to parol
explanation or contradiction. Act of RECEIVING; also, the fact of receiving or BEING
RECEIVED; that which is received; that which COMES IN, in distinction from what is
expended, paid out, sent away, and the like. (Black4)

DEBENTURE - noun - [Fr. from Latin debeo, to owe.] 1. A writing ACKNOWLEDGING A

DEBT; a writing or CERTIFICATE SIGNED BY A PUBLIC OFFICER, AS EVIDENCE OF A
DEBT DUE TO SOME PERSON. This paper, given by an ofÞcer of the customs, entitles a
merchant exporting goods, to the receipt of a bounty, or a drawback of duties. When issued
by a treasurer, it entitles the holder to a sum of money from the state. 2. In the customs, a
certiÞcate of drawback; a writing which states that a person is entitled to a certain sum from
the government, on the exportation of speciÞed goods, the duties on which had been paid.
(Webs1828)

—=—

A man in citizenship is the agent in receivership and surety of United States property, the legal
person, as the act of conducting oneÕs actions in strawman form. The birth certiÞcate is the receipt
of that thing of valuation, as an admission in discovery and disclosure of fact regarding the creation
of a legal entity (natural person) in infancy. This is evidence of debt and obligation to the United
States, the Þrst alienation and fall of man into legal citizenship (sacrament) with the United States
through its district (seizure). To be clear, it has no afÞrmative obligation upon an infant until, when
attaining adulthood, the infant continues to use the beneÞts and status of that legal personhood
(mark, name, and number) under allegiance to the United States with voluntary consent (action in
legalized adultery). This is a conÞrmation of that which is voidable into something which is ratiÞed
as unavoidable. The man generally has no idea what he is doing, acting only in the custom he is

!705
brought forth in by his parents and extremely limited public education, and so this state of legal
existence seems perfectly normal to us by the time we are able to avoid it by voiding it through
quitting (quitclaim). Ignorance is always key to enslavement.

But can a ship really sail on anything but Real water? We must of course remember that most legal
terms are Þgurative, metaphorical, and downright lies.

For instance, the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition, deÞnes
water as:

WATER - a. The VALUATION of the assets of a business Þrm BEYOND THEIR REAL
VALUE. b. Stock issued in excess of paid-in capital… b. A level of excellence… (from
thesaurus) - 1. TO LESSEN THE STRENGTH OF BY OR AS IF BY ADMIXTURE. Also used
with (water) down.


WATERING - To increase (the number of shares of stock) without increasing the value of the
assets represented.

UNDER WATER - 1. BEING OR HOLDING AN ASSET that is worth less than its purchase
price or the debt owed on it. 2. Not making enough money to meet Þnancial obligations.

—=—

To be clear, only through the placing of some artiÞcial valuation in money or other credit or debt
instrument in mammon upon what is Real and of GodÕs Nature (Creation) can things be liquiÞed.
In other words, to cause a Þctional representation of anything in Nature is equal to taking away its
substance therein, causing it to appear in the form of a liquid asset. By recreating (legally naming)
what is solid (of substance) into what is of the water (form without substance), only then may all
things be pretended subservient to its creator (issuer of name). This extra or lessened valuation
(credit or debt) simply does not Exist in Nature, and yet it is the epitome of how legal Þction and
law rules over the Law of Nature, which admits to no such valuation. To be perfectly clear, without
credit there would be no government or rulers. And without debt, there would be no subjects.
Without money (false valuation), this work would be entirely pointless, for only God’s Creation
would remain Whole and without artiÞce.

Collins English Dictionary, Complete and Unabridged (2003), states that water is (Þguratively):

WATER - 12. (Banking & Finance) a. Capital stock issued without a corresponding increase
in paid-up capital, so that the book value of the company's capital is not fully represented by
assets or earning power. b. THE FICTITIOUS OR UNREALISTIC ASSET ENTRIES THAT
REFLECT SUCH INFLATED BOOK VALUE OF CAPITAL.


HOLD WATER - 15. To prove credible, logical, or consistent: the alibi did not hold water.

—=—

Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary (2010) states:

WATER - 11. FICTITIOUS ASSETS OR THE INFLATED VALUES GIVEN TO THE STOCK
OF A CORPORATION. 21. To discharge… 23. Of or pertaining to water in any way… 30.
RESIDING BY OR IN, OR RULING OVER, water: water people; water deities.

HOLD WATER - 2. Hold water, to be able to be substantiated or defended…

LIKE WATER - Freely; abundantly; lavishly…

—=—

!706
We use these terms metaphorically terms all of the time without pausing to consider what we are
saying. It has become as second nature to us. This is a bad thing, of course, for we are allowing
Þction to justify and excuse our course of action. We are nicknaming our sins with more acceptable
terms of art. We are not Living in Reality.

Finally, we can follow the trail of this virtual water jurisdiction so as to Þnd a great ßood upon the
entirety of all the land; the great sea of commerce over which the spiritually Living Jesus christ was
able to walk upon without becoming legally wet (wed) in any legal commercial capacity, for the
spiritual man contains no legal capacity for person-hood or for engagement upon that great sea of
commerce:

FLOOD - noun - ßud. 1. A great ßow of water; a body of moving water; particularly, a body
of water, rising, swelling and OVERFLOWING LAND NOT USUALLY COVERED WITH
WATER… 2. THE FLOOD BY WAY OF EMINENCE, THE DELUGE; THE GREAT BODY OF
WATER WHICH INUNDATED THE EARTH IN THE DAYS OF NOAH. Before the ßood
men live to a great age. 3. A river; a sense chießy POETICAL… 5. A great quantity; an
inundation; an overßowing; abundance; superabundance; AS A FLOOD OF BANK NOTES;
A FLOOD OF PAPER CURRENCY. 6. A great body or stream of any ßuid substance; as a
ßood of light; a ßood of lava. Hence, FIGURATIVELY, A FLOOD OF VICE. 7. Menstrual
discharge. - verb transitive - To overßow; to inundate; to deluge; as, to ßood a meadow.
(Webs1828)

DELUGE - noun - [Latin To wash.] 1. Any overßowing of water; an inundation; a ßood; a

swell of water over the natural banks of a river or shore of the ocean, spreading over the
adjacent land. But appropriately, the great ßood or overßowing of the earth by water, in the
days of Noah; according to the common chronology, Anno Mundi, 1656. Genesis 6:1. 2. A
SWEEPING OR OVERWHELMING CALAMITY. - verb transitive - 1. To overßow with water;
to inundate; to drown. The waters deluged the earth and destroyed the old WORLD. 2. To
overwhelm; to cover with ANY ßowing or moving, spreading body. The Northern nations
deluged the Roman empire with their armies. 3. TO OVERWHELM; TO CAUSE TO SINK
UNDER THE WEIGHT OF A GENERAL OR SPREADING CALAMITY; AS, THE LAND Is
DELUGED WITH CORRUPTION. (Webs1828)

WATER - As designating A COMMODITY OR A SUBJECT OF OWNERSHIP, this term has

the same meaning in law as in common speech; but in another sense, and especially in the
plural, it may designate a body of water, such as a river, a lake, or an ocean, or an aggregate
of such bodies of water, as in the phrases "FOREIGN WATERS," "WATERS OF THE UNITED
STATES," and the like. WATER IS NEITHER LAND NOR TENEMENT NOR SUSCEPTIBLE
OF ABSOLUTE OWNERSHIP. It is A MOVABLE THING and must of necessity continue
COMMON BY THE LAW OF NATURE. It admits only of A TRANSIENT
USUFRUCTUARY PROPERTY, and if it escapes for a moment the right to it is gone forever,
THE QUALIFIED OWNER HAVING NO LEGAL POWER OF RECLAMATION. It is not
capable of being sued for by the name of "water," nor by a calculation of its cubical or
superÞcial measure; but the suit must be brought for THE LAND which lies at the bottom
COVERED WITH WATER. As WATER IS NOT LAND, NEITHER IS IT A TENEMENT,
BECAUSE IT IS NOT OF A PERMANENT NATURE, NOR THE SUBJECT OF ABSOLUTE
PROPERTY. It is not in any possible sense real estate, and hence is not embraced in a
covenant of general warranty. (Black2)

WARRANTY - noun - 1. In law, a promise or covenant by deed, made by the BARGAINER

for himself and his heirs, to warrant or SECURE THE BARGAINEE AND HIS HEIRS
AGAINST ALL MEN in the enjoyment of an estate or other thing granted. Such warranty
passes from the seller to the buyer, from the feoffor to the feoffee, and from the releaser to
the releasee. Warranty is real, when annexed to lands and tenements granted in fee or for life,
etc. And is in deed or in law; and personal, when it respects goods sold or their quality. In
common recoveries, A FICTITIOUS PERSON IS CALLED TO WARRANTY. In the sale of

!707
 goods or personal property, the seller warrants the title; the warranty is express or implied. If
a man sells goods which are not his own, or which he has no right to sell, the purchaser may
have satisfaction for the injury. And if the seller expressly warrants the goods to be sound
and not defective, and they prove to be otherwise, he must indemnify the purchaser; of the
law implies A CONTRACT IN THE WARRANTY TO MAKE GOOD ANY DEFECT. But the
warranty must be at the time of sale, and not afterwards. 2. Authority; justiÞcatory mandate
or precept. If they disobey any precept, THAT IS NO EXCUSE TO US, nor gives us any
warranty to disobey likewise. [In this sense, warrant is now used.] 3. SECURITY. The stamp
was a warranty of the public. - verb transitive - To warrant; TO GUARANTY. [A useless
word.] (Webs1828)

—=—

Everything we do is upon the legal, virtual water, in a commercial vessel (person). In short, since
water is movable and cannot be insured (warrantied), and it can never be land or tenement, it
cannot be owned as real property. So everything we do in public is not attached to the ground,
ßowing instead only in the virtual waters of commerce. And so we may own nothing, for things of
the nature of water are common, public, and thus not able to be privately held. We are the victims of
a great ßood, a deluge of corruption in a system of total, organized criminality. A private land-
holder holds dry land, but a public citizenship only virtually ßoats over it in a national commercial
vessel (citizen-ship) as a foreigner on the territory (land), and thus only temporarily as an unÞxed
resident with no domicile in that place of actual residence. Home is not residence. Home is only
domicile. Residence without domicile is thus not home; not Þxed, only temporary as in the time
domain. A United States district citizen-ship that is a legal, commercial resident in California, has
his Þxed home (domicile) in the foreign United States only, in that place of the birth of its legal
creation (impersonation), and not in any several (private) state (territory/land). The US person is
foreign to California. Like a ship ßying its home nationÕs ßag, a US citizenship is a foreigner with
temporary permission (license of personhood) to reside and act in that foreign, private State, under
that commercial state government (in water) as a resident only, one without domain in the estate of
the State sovereignty over those lands.

We may also come to understand the intent of what seems almost ridiculous in the chapters of the
Old Testament, such as those of Leviticus, where the metaphor and the literal are used in moral
teachings. We are, of course, not supposed to touch the ßesh of anything Òin the waterÓ that is not a
Natural Source of sustenance. For we know what lurks in the commercial sea is not that which will
nourish us…

—=—

“These shall ye eat of all that are IN THE WATERS: whatsoever hath
Þns and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye
eat. And all that have not Þns and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of
all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the
waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: They shall be even an
abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their ßesh, but ye shall have
their carcases in abomination. Whatsoever hath no Þns nor scales in the
waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.”
—Leviticus 11: 9-12, KJB

—=—

!708
Remember that the Þgurative deÞnition for water is that which is Òof danger, violence, transitory
things, refreshment.Ó The scriptures are chalked full of this Þgurative notion of the water, of being
raised and cleansed and washed when there is no actually water to be found or discussed.

—=—

He sent from above, he took me, HE DREW ME OUT OF MANY

WATERS. He delivered me from my strong enemy, and from them
which hated me: for they were too strong for me. They prevented me in
the day of my calamity: but the LORD was my stay… The LORD
rewarded me according to my righteousness; ACCORDING TO THE
CLEANNESS OF MY HANDS hath he recompensed me. FOR I HAVE
KEPT THE WAYS OF THE LORD, AND HAVE NOT WICKEDLY
DEPARTED FROM MY GOD.
—Psalms 18: 16-18, and 20-21, KJB

—=—

All water is common, which means individuals may not own it, for it has no stability or foundation
in and of itself and is not anchored to the land. A public person is of the water, having only unclean
hands and Þguratively eating of what is unNatural to Creation (respecting art/Þctions of the
commercial sea and its maritime law).

Everything under that deluge of legal terms and jurisdiction in personhood is property of the
church and state (corporations) and their creators. Water is not land (soil), just as persons are not
men. Persons only exist in the ßood, as the liquidation of virtual water in commerce. Public persons
may only be operated on the sea (see) of interstate commerce, for they are the ships (commercial
vessels) sailing in agency and thus ßying the ßag and Arms of their principal (father of the
common, soulless, bloodless people) just as it was in days of old. But the United States ßag is that
of the Dread Pirate Washington.

DOMINANT ESTATE OR TENEMENT - That to which A SERVITUDE OR EASEMENT IS

DUE, or for the beneÞt of which it exists. A TERM USED IN THE CIVIL AND SCOTCH
LAW, AND THENCE IN OURS, relating to servitudes, meaning the tenement or subject in
favor of which the service is constituted; AS THE TENEMENT OVER WHICH THE
SERVITUDE EXTENDS is called the Òservient tenement.” (Black4)

TENEMENTAL - adjective - Pertaining to TENANTED LANDS; THAT IS OR MAY BE HELD

BY TENANTS. Tenemental lands they distributed among their tenants. (Webs1828)

TENENS - A tenant; THE DEFENDANT IN A REAL ACTION. (Black4)

DOMICILED - Established in a given domicile; BELONGING TO A GIVEN STATE OR

JURISDICTION BY RIGHT OF DOMICILE. (Black4)

DOMICILIARY - Pertaining to domicile; relating to one's domicile. EXISTING OR

CREATED AT, OR CONNECTED WITH, THE DOMICILE of a suitor or of a decedent.
(Black4)

DOMICILIATE - To establish one's domicile; to take up one's FIXED residence in a given

place. To establish the domicile of another person WHOSE LEGAL RESIDENCE FOLLOWS
ONE'S OWN. (Black4)

!709
DOMIICUM - Latin. Domain; demain; demesne. A LORDSHIP. That of which one has the
lordship or ownership. THAT WHICH REMAINS UNDER THE LORD'S IMMEDIATE
CHARGE AND CONTROL. In Domesday Book it meant THE HOME FARM AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM THE HOLDINGS OF THE TENANTS. In Eleventh Century 253.
Property; domain; anything pertaining to a lord. In Ecclesiastical law. A CHURCH, or any
other building consecrated to God. (Black4)

DOMINIUM - In the civil and old English' law. Ownership; PROPERTY IN THE LARGEST
SENSE, including both the right of property and the right of possession or USE. The mere
right of property, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM THE POSSESSION OR USUFRUCT. THE
RIGHT WHICH A LORD HAD IN THE FEE OF HIS TENANT. In this sense the word is
very clearly distinguished by Bracton from dominicum. The estate of a feoffee to uses. "The
feoffee to use shall have the dominium, and the cestui que use the disposition."
SOVEREIGNTY OR DOMINION. (Black4)

DOMINIUM MARIS - THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE SEA. (Black4)

DOMINION - The right of the owner of a thing TO USE IT OR DISPOSE OF IT AT HIS

PLEASURE. (Bouv1856)

DOMAIN - The complete and ABSOLUTE OWNERSHIP OF LAND; a paramount and

individual right of property in land. Also the real estate so owned. The INHERENT
SOVEREIGN POWER CLAIMED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF A STATE, of controlling
private property for public uses, is termed the "right of eminent domain.” A distinction has
been made between "property" and "domain." The former (property) is said to be that quality
which is conceived to be IN THE THING ITSELF, considered as belonging to such or such
person, exclusively of all others. By the latter (domain) is understood that right which the
owner has OF DISPOSING OF THE THING. Hence "domain" and "property" are said to be
correlative terms. The one (domain) is the active right to dispose of: the other (property) A
PASSIVE QUALITY WHICH FOLLOWS THE THING and places it at the disposition of the
owner. National domain is sometimes applied to the aggregate of the property owned
directly by a nation. PUBLIC DOMAIN EMBRACES ALL LANDS, THE TITLE TO WHICH
IS IN THE UNITED STATES, including as well land occupied for the purposes of federal
buildings, arsenals, dock-yards, etc., as land of an agricultural or mineral character not yet
granted to PRIVATE OWNERS. (Black4)

DOMAIN - It signiÞes sometimes, dominion, territory governed – sometimes, possession,

estate – and sometimes, land about the mansion house of a lord. By domain is also
understood THE RIGHT TO DISPOSE AT OUR PLEASURE OF WHAT BELONGS TO
US… (Bouv1856)

EMINENCE - A title of honor given to cardinals. (Bouv1856)

CARDINAL - Ecclesiastical law. The title given to one of the highest dignitaries of the
COURT (government) OF ROME. CARDINALS ARE NEXT TO THE POPE IN DIGNITY; HE
IS ELECTED BY THEM AND OUT OF THEIR BODY (body politic). There are cardinal
bishops, cardinal priests, and cardinal deacons. (Bouv1856)

DISPOSAL - Sale, pledge, giving away, use, consumption or any other disposition of a
thing. TO EXERCISE CONTROL OVER; TO DIRECT OR ASSIGN FOR A USE; TO PASS
OVER INTO THE CONTROL OF SOME ONE ELSE; TO ALIENATE, bestow, or part with.
(Black4)

DISPOSE OF - To alienate or direct the ownership of property, as disposition by will. Used

also of the determination of suits. Called a word of large extent. TO EXERCISE FINALLY, in
any manner, one's power of control over; to pass into the control of someone else; to

!710
alienate, relinquish, part with, or get rid of; to put out of the way; to Þnish with; TO
BARGAIN AWAY. Often used in restricted sense of "sale" only, or so restricted by context.
(Black4)

DOMESTIC SERVANT - See Domestic. (Black4)

DOMESTIC - adjective - Pertaining, BELONGING, or relating to A HOME, a DOMICILE, or

to the PLACE OF BIRTH, ORIGIN, CREATION, or transaction. (Black4)

DOMESTIC ANIMALS - Such as are habituated to live in or about the habitations of men,
or SUCH AS CONTRIBUTE TO THE SUPPORT OF A FAMILY OR THE WEALTH OF THE
COMMUNITY. This term includes horses, male goat, cattle, parrot. (Black4)

DOMESTIC COURTS - Those EXISTING AND HAVING JURISDICTION AT THE PLACE

OF THE PARTY'S RESIDENCE OR DOMICILE. (Black4)

DOMESTICATED - MADE domestic OR CONVERTED to domestic USE. (Black4)

DOMICELLUS - In old English law. A better sort of servant in monasteries; also an

appellation (name) of A KING'S BASTARD. (Black4)

DOMICILE - That place where a man has his TRUE, FIXED, and PERMANENT HOME and
PRINCIPAL ESTABLISHMENT, and to which whenever he is absent he has the
INTENTION OF RETURNING. Not for a mere special or temporary purpose, but with the
present intention of making a permanent home, FOR AN UNLIMITED OR INDEFINITE
PERIOD. In international law, a residence at a particular place, accompanied with positive or
presumptive proof of an INTENTION TO CONTINUE THERE FOR AN UNLIMITED
TIME. The word "domicile" is derived from latin "domus," meaning home or dwelling house,
and domicile is LEGAL CONCEPTION OF “HOME.” The established, Þxed, permanent, or
ordinary dwelling-place or place of residence of a PERSON, as distinguished from his
temporary and transient, THOUGH ACTUAL, place of residence. IT IS HIS LEGAL
RESIDENCE, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM HIS TEMPORARY PLACE OF ABODE; or HIS
HOME, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM A PLACE TO WHICH BUSINESS OR PLEASURE
MAY TEMPORARILY CALL HIM. "Citizenship," "habitancy," and "residence" are severally
words which in the particular case MAY MEAN PRECISELY THE SAME AS DOMICILE.
"Domicile" and "residence," however, are frequently distinguished, in that DOMICILE IS
THE HOME, the Þxed place of habitation; while RESIDENCE IS A TRANSIENT PLACE
OF DWELLING. Domicile may be deemed to be of three sorts: domicile BY BIRTH, domicile
BY CHOICE, and domicile BY OPERATION OF LAW. The Þrst is the COMMON case of the
place of birth, domicilium originis; the second is that which is VOLUNTARILY acquired by a
party, proprio motu; the last is consequential, as that of the wife arising from marriage.

National Domicile - The domicile of a person, considered as BEING WITHIN THE

TERRITORY OF A PARTICULAR NATION, and not with reference to a particular
locality or subdivision of a nation.

Quasi National Domicile - One involving residence in a state.

Municipal Domicile - One which as distinguished from "national domicile" and "quasi
national domicile" (see those titles, infra), has reference to residence in a county,
township, or municipality.

Domestic Domicile - A name sometimes used for "municipal domicile.”

Foreign Domicile - A domicile established by a citizen or subject of one sovereignty

within the territory of another.

!711
 Commercial Domicile - A domicile acquired by the maintenance of a commercial
establishment; a domicile which a citizen of a foreign country may acquire by
conducting business in another country.

Natural Domicile - The same as domicile of origin or domicile by birth.

Domicile of Origin - THE HOME OF THE PARENTS. That which arises from a man's
birth and connections. THE DOMICILE OF THE PARENTS AT THE TIME OF BIRTH,
or what is termed the "domicile of origin," constitutes the domicile of an INFANT, AND
CONTINUES UNTIL ABANDONED, or until the acquisition of a new domicile in a
different place.

Matrimonial Domicile - The place where a husband and wife have established a home, in
which they reside in the relation of husband and wife, and WHERE THE
MATRIMONIAL CONTRACT IS BEING PERFORMED. (Black4)

DOMICILIUM - Latin. Domicile. (Black4)

DOMICILED - Established in a given domicile; BELONGING TO A GIVEN STATE OR

JURISDICTION by right of domicile. (Black4)

DOMICILIARY - Pertaining to domicile; RELATING TO one's domicile. EXISTING OR

CREATED AT, OR CONNECTED WITH, the domicile of a suitor or of a decedent. (Black4)

DOMINA (DAME) - A title given to honorable women, who anciently, IN THEIR OWN
RIGHT OF INHERITANCE, held a barony. (Black4)

TRANSIENT - noun - One who, or that which is TEMPORARY. Synonymous with transitory,
fugitive, ßeeting, momentary. (Black4)

TRANSIENT - adjective - Passing across, as from one thing or person to another; passing
with time of short duration; NOT PERMANENT; not lasting. (Black4)

TRANSIENT PERSON - Within venue statute ONE WHO IS FOUND IN STATE BUT WHO
HAS NO FIXED PLACE OF RESIDENCE THEREIN. (Black4)

TRANSIENT FOREIGNER - One who visits the country, without the intention of
remaining. (Black4)

TRANSIENT MERCHANT - A merchant who engages in the vending or sale of

merchandise at any place in the state temporarily, and who does not intend to become, and
does not become, a permanent merchant of such place. (Black4)

TRANSIT - A stop-over privilege on a continuous journey granted by carrier by which a

break de facto in continuity of carriage of goods is disregarded and two legs of a journey are
treated as though covered without interruption, uniting both legs into a through route for
which a joint rate can be published. (Black4)

TRANSIRE - verb - Latin. To go, or pass over; to pass from one THING, PERSON, OR
PLACE to another. - noun - In English law. A warrant or permit for the custom-house to let
goods pass. (Black4)

DOMICILIARY ADMINISTRATION - Administration in state where PERSON was

domiciled at time of death is deemed PRINCIPAL OR PRIMARY ADMINISTRATION and
is ordinarily termed "domiciliary administration.” (Black4)

!712
 DOMICILIATE - To establish one's domicile; TO TAKE UP ONE'S FIXED RESIDENCE IN
A GIVEN PLACE. To establish the domicile OF ANOTHER PERSON WHOSE LEGAL
RESIDENCE FOLLOWS ONE'S OWN. (Black4)

DOMICILIATION - In Spanish law. The acquisition of domiciliary rights and STATUS,

nearly equivalent to naturalization, which may be accomplished BY BEING BORN IN THE
KINGDOM, by conversion to the Catholic faith there, by taking up a permanent residence
in some settlement and marrying a native woman, and BY ATTACHING ONESELF TO THE
SOIL, purchasing or acquiring real property and possessions. (Black4)

—=—

It is very simple to deÞne domicile and residence as separate concepts, but not so simple for most
to accept. For acceptance requires acknowledgement of status, and many slaves still believe they
are sovereigns, thanks to gurus and shock-jock radio personalities and ÒpatriotsÓ that either lie or
parrot their own falsely conveyed brand of tainted ÒtruthÓ in utter ignorance or purposeful deceit.

There are two conditions of natural persons. One is the domicile, one the residence. One can
maintain Þxed residence where one is domiciled, but can also maintain temporary residence in
another ÒforeignÓ place. But a domicile is always Þxed, never temporary, and so only the residence
can be separate from its source (as temporary/time-based). Domicile never changes without loss of
citizenship. A private citizen of a State, being several (separate) and thus foreign from the United
States jurisdiction, does not call the United States its master or principal, for his private person
(landed status) is not of the origin or in that districted jurisdiction. A private citizen is not a
ÒnaturalÓ person created by the United States, but is rather he whose ancestors created and control
it. The private State citizen is not seized by its own created district at birth nor certiÞed to be dead
or to have any form of public, legal, civil life. But a public citizen-ship (status at commercial sea) is
created by the United States, and therefore its domicile will always and without exception be
within that source of nativity and Þxed to it, as the United States district of Washington (New
Columbia). The creator controls. A United States citizenship has permanent domicile only in the
United States (DC), and thus can never have permanent residence in one of the several (private)
States (as the People of each sovereignty). The ship is rendered and berthed from and must be
returned (docked) to the district that created it, causing its execution (civil death) and dis-charge of
contractual performance debt. Only one domicile is possible, just as honoring only one God/god is
possible. A US citizenship can only ever be temporary in one of the several (foreign/private) states,
for nothing he may obtain as ÒpropertyÓ is Þxed to the land, but is only of the water (sea) and
possessed in usufruct only on behalf of his principal in that agency relationship, the state being a
third party to that commercial agency. His existence is purely a permissive and commercial one, and
all that he does and obtains therein is only on behalf of his principal. He has no dominion in the
lands of the actual State (People), only permission to act in commercial tenancy under rent and
tribute to that territoryÕs (sovereign PeopleÕs) commercial state government in public agency.

Quite frankly, I cannot claim any ÒNatural rightsÓ in a State for which I am only a temporary, legal
resident within because I am a foreigner (alien) to that land (territory), having only the capacity to
drive and converse a public United States vessel on public highways and roads. I can only conduct
commercial activity in public places where United States citizen-ships are allowed to sail that
public commercial sea by license and easement. US citizen-ships are always foreign in their
political nature to any other state (country) or nation, for they are not of or claiming the right of
blood inheritance and heirdom to any land therein.

Even the ÒroadÓ is just a virtual waterway for commercial vessels, as dirt, brick, and asphalt
ßooded by the artiÞcial sea of commerce. The holy, sacred (cursed) Roman See.

RULE OF THE ROAD - The popular English name for the regulations governing the
NAVIGATION OF VESSELS IN PUBLIC WATERS, with a view to preventing collisions.
(Black4)

!713
SEA - noun - SEE. [This word, like LAKE, signiÞes primarily A SEAT, SET or LAY, A
REPOSITORY, a bason.] 1. A large bason, cisternor laver which Solomon made in the temple,
so large as to contain more than six thousand gallons. This was called THE BRAZEN SEA,
and used to hold water for the priests to wash themselves. 1 Kings 7:23. 2 Chronicles 4:2. 2. A
large BODY of water, nearly inclosed by land, as the Baltic or the Mediterranean; as the sea of
Azof. Seas are properly BRANCHES OF THE OCEAN, and upon the same level. Large
bodies of water inland, and situated above the level of the ocean, are lakes. The appellation
(name) of sea, given to the Caspian lake, is an exception, and not very correct. So the lake of
Galilee is called a sea, from the Greek. 3. The ocean; as, to go to sea. The ßeet is at sea, or on
the high seas. 4. A wave; a billow; a surge. THE VESSEL SHIPPED AT SEA… 6. Proverbially,
a large quantity of liquor; AS A SEA OF BLOOD. 7. A rough or AGITATED PLACE OR
ELEMENT. In a troubled sea of passion tost. Milton. (Webs1828)

SEE - noun - 1. The SEAT of episcopal power; a diocese; the jurisdiction of a bishop. 2. THE
SEAT of an archbishop; a province or JURISDICTION of an archbishop; as an
archiepiscopal see. 3. The seat, place or ofÞce of the pope or Roman pontif; AS THE PAPAL
SEE. 4. THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE OR COURT OF ROME; AS, TO APPEAL TO THE
SEE OF ROME. - verb transitive - [Latin sequor, and Eng. essay, are all from the same radix. The
primary sense of the root is TO STRAIN, stretch, extend; and as applied to see, the sense is to
extend to, to reach, to strike with the eye or sight.] 1. To perceive by the eye; to have
knowledge of the EXISTENCE AND THE APPARENT QUALITIES of objects by the organs
of sight; to behold. I will now turn aside and see this great sight. Exodus 3:3. We have seen the
land, and behold, it is very good. Judges 18:1. 2. To observe; TO NOTE OR NOTICE; TO
KNOW; to regard or look to; to take care; to attend, AS TO THE EXECUTION OF SOME
ORDER, OR TO THE PERFORMANCE OF SOMETHING. Give them the Þrst one simple
idea, and see that they fully comprehend before you go any farther. Locke. See that ye fall not
out by the way. Genesis 45:12. 3. TO DISCOVER; to descry; TO UNDERSTAND. Who so dull
as not to see the device or strategem? Very notable actions often lose much of their
excellence WHEN THE MOTIVES ARE SEEN. 4. To converse or HAVE INTERCOURSE
WITH. We improve by seeing men of different habits and tempers. 5. To visit; as, to call and
see a friend. The physician sees his patient twice a day. 6. To attend; to remark or notice. I had
a mind to see him out, and therefore did not care to contradict him. Addison. 7. To behold
with patience or SUFFERANCE; to endure. It was not meet (meant) for us to see the king's
dishonor. Ezra 4:14. 8. In Scripture, to hear or attend to. I turned to see the voice that spoke
with me. Revelation 1:7. 9. To feel; TO SUFFER; TO EXPERIENCE. Make us glad according to
the days wherein thou hast afßicted us, and the years in which we have seen evil. Psalms 90:1.
IF A MAN SHALL KEEP MY SAYING, HE SHALL NEVER SEE DEATH. John 8:51. Luke
2:15. 10. To know; TO LEARN. Go, I pray thee, see whether it be well with thy brethren.
Genesis 37:14. 11. To perceive; TO UNDERSTAND; to comprehend. I see the train of
argument; I see his motives. 12. To perceive; to understand experimentally. I see another law
in my members. Romans 7:23. 13. To beware. See thou do it not. Revelation 1:79. 14. TO
KNOW BY REVELATION. The word that Isaiah, the son of Amoz, saw concerning Judah and
Jerusalem. Isaiah 2:8. 15. TO HAVE FAITH IN AND RELIANCE ON. Seeing him who is
INVISIBLE. Hebrews 11:5. 16. TO ENJOY; to have fruition of. Blessed are THE PURE IN
HEART, FOR THEY SHALL SEE GOD. Matthew 5:8. - verb intransitive - 1. To have the power
of perceiving by the proper organs, or the power of sight. Some animals, it is said, are able to
see best in the night. 2. To discern; TO HAVE INTELLECTUAL SIGHT; to penetrate; TO
UNDERSTAND; with through or into; as, TO SEE THROUGH THE PLANS OR POLICY
OF ANOTHER; to see into ARTFUL SCHEMES AND PRETENSIONS. 3. To examine or
inquire. See wether the estimate is correct. 4. To be attentive. 5. TO HAVE FULL
UNDERSTANDING. But now ye say, we see, therefore your sin remaineth. John 9:41. Let me
see, let us see, are used TO EXPRESS CONSIDERATION, OR TO INTRODUCE THE
PARTICULAR CONSIDERATION OF A SUBJECT, OR SOME SCHEME OR
CALCULATION. See is used imperatively, to call the attention of others to an object or a
subject. See, see, how the balloon ascends. See what it is to have a poet in your house. Pope.
(Webs1828)

!714
 SEAT - noun - [L. sedes, situs.] 1. That on which one sits; a chair, bench, stool or any other
thing on which a person sits. Christ--overthrew the tables of the money changers and the
seats of them that sold doves. Matthew 21:12. 2. The place of sitting; THRONE; CHAIR OF
STATE; TRIBUNAL; POST OF AUTHORITY; AS THE SEAT OF JUSTICE; JUDGMENT-
SEAT. 3. MANSION; RESIDENCE; dwelling; abode; AS ITALY THE SEAT OF EMPIRE. The
Greeks sent colonies to seek a new seat in Gaul. In Albe he shall Þx his royal seat. Dryden. 4.
Site; situation. The seat of Eden has never been incontrovertibly ascertained… 7. A pew or slip
in a church; a place to sit in. 8. The place where a thing is SETTLED OR ESTABLISHED.
LONDON IS THE SEAT OF BUSINESS and opulence. So we say, the seat of the muses, THE
SEAT OF ARTS, THE SEAT OF COMMERCE. - verb transitive - 1. To place on a seat; to cause
to sit down… 2. TO PLACE IN A POST OF AUTHORITY, IN OFFICE or a place of
distinction. He seated his son in the professor's chair. Then high was king Richard seated.
Shak. 3. TO SETTLE; TO FIX IN A PARTICULAR PLACE OR COUNTRY. A colony of
Greeks seated themselves in the south of Italy; another at Massilia in Gaul. 4. TO FIX; TO SET
FIRM. From their foundations, loosening to and fro, They pluck'd the seated hills. Milton. 5.
To place in a church; to assign seats to… 8. TO SETTLE; TO PLANT WITH INHABITANTS;
AS, TO SEAT A COUNTRY. [Not used much.] - verb intransitive - To rest; to LIE down. [Not
in use.] (Webs1828)

SEATED LAND - Land that is occupied, cultivated, improved, RECLAIMED, farmed, or

used as a place of RESIDENCE. Residence without cultivation, or cultivation without
residence, or both together, impart to land THE CHARACTER of being seated. The term is
used, as opposed to "unseated land," in Pennsylvania tax laws. (Black4)

—=—

It is common for most people to claim to be able to see an idea when it makes sense to them in their
mind. And yet we accept this as if it were a reasonable response, knowing that it is a fallacy, a lie of
the imagination. But, we say, ÒIt makes sense.Ó But with a minute! What exactly makes sense? Dare
I say that our only senses are what God Designed? Taste, touch, sight, etc? So how can an idea make
sense? What I am trying to say is that this is not a term of Nature, and therefore neither should the
Holy See be taken as a Creation of Jehovah. Though this word see is deÞned above as that which
can be known by revelation (discovery), we must always consider the source and intent of that
which we “see” to determine it as a Real sense or as non-sense. What comes from the mouth of the
pope is uttered nonsense; the Þction of the ecclesia.This is a false doctrine of that which is not of the
senses and not a self-evident Truth. In fact, it’s just a lot of Bull.

The history of what is called today as Washington, DC and formally as the “District of Columbia,”
which more commonly is referred to in political (Þctional) discourse as ÒWashington,Ó Òthe
District,” or simply “DC,” is the seated, permanent capital and residence of the “United States.”
The district has no seat and residence any where else, and the exclusivity of its jurisdiction under the
congress of the United States (known ofÞcially in congressional records as: Òthe Senate and House
of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled”) exists in all public
places within the United States.

The signing by “Congress assembled” of the Residence Act on July 16, 1790, approved the creation
of a commercial, capital district located along the Potomac River of the East Coast. The US
Constitution provided for a residence to house the “seat” of government, a federal district under
the exclusive jurisdiction of the Congress. This district is therefore not a part of any US State in
compact, and so neither is any citizen-ship under it. Citizen-ships of the United States are State-
less, which is to say we are not part of the private (several) People (States) in contractual con-
federation and compact of “friendship” with each other.

We see that speciÞc act and declaration of immunity in privacy declared by each foreign, several
State (People) in the Þrst three articles of confederation:

!715
 I. The STILE of this Confederacy shall be “The United States of America.”

II. EACH STATE RETAINS ITS SOVEREIGNTY, freedom, and independence, and every
power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation EXPRESSLY delegated to
the United States, in Congress assembled.

III. The said States hereby SEVERALLY enter into A FIRM LEAGUE OF FRIENDSHIP
WITH EACH OTHER, for THEIR common defense, the security of THEIR liberties, and
THEIR mutual and general welfare, binding THEMSELVES to assist each other, AGAINST
ALL force offered to, or attacks made upon THEM, or any of THEM, ON ACCOUNT OF
RELIGION, SOVEREIGNTY, trade, OR ANY OTHER PRETENSE WHATEVER…

—=—

There is no way to take this last statement or article but as them against us, as “the People” (the
States in Union) against the non-People. And so we really need to stop and think about this for a
moment, and ask ourselves a few simple questions:

What could possibly be the reason for creating such a confederation of several People (States) if
every man in this geographical region or later naturalized (dwelled/peopled) upon these lands
were part of those landholding People (States)? What could possibly be the purpose of creating a
public sphere and a constitution protecting slavery unless all men were not included within the
description of those private People (States)?

One very important consideration here is that each of these private States retain its individual
sovereignty (privacy) except that which is ceded (given/abandoned) to the United States. Thus the
United States again is not one of the States united. And so inversely, and this is key to our public
disposition in civil life without such privacy, that which is of (belonging to) the “United States” is
that which is not of (belonging to) the private States. This fact is enforced and reenforced whenever
the patriotic delusion of nationality (ethnicity) is challenged and spiritually guided reason without
ego and Self-defense of the third person id-entity in mammon takes over. These hidden gems are
almost all hidden under such obtuseness; little pieces of a much greater and disturbing puzzle
where words must be rearranged and restated for full comprehension. This deciphering method
does not change the meaning mind you, but only causes it to be clear from the opposing
perspective of the slave bound to it. For all law is written to promote the masterÕs beneÞt, of course.
It would be foolhardy to believe otherwise.

The 13th amendment is a prime example of this obfuscation of intent through the use of legal word
magic and propaganda, where on its surface it states that, “involuntary slavery and servitude” was
abolished. But in Reality, it also negatively states that slavery is to be recreated into the voluntary
state of what would become national citizenship via the 14th amendment, which is said to be a
“punishment for crime,” as the illegitimate but legally permissive and sanctioned birth (felony)
certiÞcation and the resulting imprisonment (nativity) within the nation (district) as a debtor. To
put it simply, the 13th amendment created and legalized a national, voluntarily contracted relation-
ship of slavery/servitude. These magicians of words are very clever, for they are the keepers and
magistrates (gods) and devils (evil geniuses) over this debtor’s hell. And it is most often what they
do not speciÞcally say that is the most important aspect of their trickery.

Obviously, by the writing of these “articles,” the entity called as the “United States” is being
distinctly pointed out as that which is separate from the actual confederacy (conspiracy) of private
States, as a separate entity that must have congressional approval as so assembled as “the People”
of those States for anything to be given or ceded to it, including their “sovereignty, freedom, and
independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right.”

Now stop and consider this from the perspective of a public citizenship of the United States. Have
you ever had an opportunity of privy (privilege) to declare any of these things and withhold them

!716
from that nation? No, of course not… They are not yours to withhold. You are acting publicly, not
privately, not severally as one of the People (States). You never reserved any of these unalienable,
Natural rights, and so you have no right to declare them while in the voluntary servitude of a US
citizen-ship. These things only apply to those not in this debtor’s prison of hell. A US person has no
choices such as these. And so again we must realize that the creation of these things was not in-
tended for every man, but only for the protection and “friendship” of those who sought to rule
over all others, and to leave that incorporated slave-state (nation) to their “posterity” (bloodlines).
As Arthur Schopenhauer so succinctly stated, eventually these Truths will become self-evident in
men’s minds, even to the most brainwashed, voluntarily ignorant, and patriotic of their induced
victims. What they do about it is another question, a Truth only known to the future holder of such
devastating knowledge.

If all men were sovereign and private, then this whole thing would be redundant and pointless, for
no man (or all men) would be so without question, and no government would be needed for
public, commercial purposes! This point indirectly answers the question as to who that private
“We, the People” actually are, and also lets us know that this “People” is not any man acting solely
in a legal, public persona created by some municipality (as a commercial principality and district).
That which exists only by Þction of law inside (of) the district is obviously not several (foreign/
private) from it. And so the constitution negatively protects only those whose name is not upon the
registers of that distressful and distraining district of Caesar (seizure), as those whose birth is not
certiÞed therein and whose blood is not Þguratively tainted by its legalistic (artiÞcial) law. He who
acquires rights from this district is subject to its jurisdiction and loses all Natural considerations
(e.g., God-given Rights), while those who reserve all Natural Rights from it stand as its artful
masters.

This confederation (combination/conspiracy) of private (several) States (Peoples) of Òthe united

States of America” in compact for their own mutual protection is not to be confused with the
constitution of the “United States” as their own creation of a district and holding corporation for
all things public and based purely in commerce. For remember, the established “state” is separated
from the ordained “church" (People). It should also not be confused that in any way this so-called
confederation between States was ever disbanded or replaced by that later created constitution.
Only the names were changed to legally protect the not-so-innocent. To put it as simple as possible,
Þrst the conspiracy in confederation was formed, and only then was the United States federal
district and seat of commercial government formed in and under said conspiracy of combined,
confederated but still private States. It was nothing more than a business arrangement between
conspirators. Thus, the “United States” holds an inferior sovereignty under those Sovereign States
(We, the landed People) that created it, while those public subjects under the United States
corporation in public citizenship to it lay subject to that sovereignty of People, and are governed
through this holding company called (styled) as the “United States,” as controlled by those private
People of the united States of America as represented in “Congress assembled.” The commercial
ÒcongressÓ created into the US Code by Òthe Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled” is not the same, but is a similar body, as a man that
wears two hats, or in this case two faces.

To place this into metaphoric terms for ease of understanding, we might compare these two bodies
corporate to the stockholding owners of a corporation (shareholders) as opposed to the board of
directors and CEO of that same corporation that is privately owned. One is a private stakeholder,
one is the title of a public ofÞcer. While the ofÞcers (congressmen/directors) and CEO share in their
ownership privately as shareholder (landholders), they act publicly in their administration of this
corporation under legal titles. In other words, they wear two hats. Board members are often paid in
shares of the company, and so are both shareholders (landholders) and members of the board (US
congress). The title of ÒcongressmanÒ is only a legal person in law, a Þction of law, and so as
congressmen in ßattering title they direct the non-constitutional, non-governmental, commercial
aspect of the “United States” independently of their status of private citizens of the “united States
of America.” The States (People) are the share or stakeholders in union (private compact), while the
titled ofÞcers of congress created by US Code are merely employees, artiÞcial persons designated

!717
as the board of directors of the corporation (United States). Congress, when assembled in their
supposedly de jure (lawful/legitimate) functionality as the “Congress assembled” (of America) in
confederation, are acting as representatives of and as We, the People. But in this non-governmental
capacity as the commercial congress (board of directors) of the “United States” under the
commercial US Code, they are merely the lawmakers and managers of human capital in interstate
and international trade. They are the de facto keepers and moneychangers of mammon.

Notice that the word stile is used to address the name given to this confederacy (conspiracy) of
People (States). Remember from the beginning of this work that the words stile is a term that means
title. And of course, he or they who have the power to create a title (stile) of any thing must
therefore be in propriety (ownership) of that thing. No subject of anything may create its own title
or name. They who stile any thing must, in other words, be the private landholders. They must
have the power of perfect title and of usufruct, the ability to use and dispose of that thing.

And as globalism vastly approaches, that is exactly what they are doing; disposing of their national
sovereignty (but not their State sovereignty) by collectively and incrementally constructing and
embracing through legislature of the People (in Congress assembled) the United Nations, where
the “United States” will be just another state of and under the United Nations. They will retain their
own sovereignty as a private “People” under private law while allowing their constituted nation to
be placed fully under international peacekeeping and law. They will still be negatively protected in
their human capital and land management of the multitudes of commoners, but their subjects (you
and me) in commercial citizen-ship will not. For it was never our country, but theirs. We are only
tolerated refugees, allowed license to inhabit by tenancy their private lands in a publicly registered
capacity. It is their corporation and jurisdiction to alter and dispose of as they see Þt. And the more
we, the plebes Þght against this legalized transformation into an international commercial control
system, the more we will be militarily punished for our insubordination by this international
peace-keeping force assigned to protect the private bloodlines of “People” (sovereign State
corporations) of all the world. Ironically, it will only really be house-slaves killing and controlling
other slaves again on behalf of their masters (principal governments), just like in the American civil
war. The agentic psychology of the non compos mentis, public-minded multitudes of every nation
united in confederacy (conspiracy, combination) will rise mercenarily against any fellow slave of
any other nation that gets out of line, causing all in the public realm to bear the mark of mammon
so as to “legally” buy, sell, or trade within that international, global feud of a beast system.

But the private People (States) as the landholders of Earth titled in allodium will remain in their
own corporately declared sovereignty, and so will essentially remain in lawlessness as all the slave-
holders of history have. For slavery by any other name is still slavery.

A man either sets his own course and Þxes his Self under the Laws of Nature, or he converses with
artiÞcial (evil) forces and allows his path to be set before him, forever aßoat on that watery Þction
that will never provide anchorage and quietness from man’s false law and tax. One either plays the
part of an actor of the state or one takes all responsibility for his private Nature and renders back to
Caesar what is publicly Caesar’s property, for a private man cannot act publicly, else he must
answer for that sin to Caesar (in seizure).

And Caesar’s best trickery was always the promotion of sport, which the pursuit of money is; a
game of monopoly where we ßow with the tide and pay Þnes for landing on and using the
property of private owners, and where the central bank is god. But it was only when the sports
were taken out of the coliseum and made part of society that Caesar’s power of distraction
defeated the multitude, a trivial pursuit in the category of mammon.

CONVERSE - verb intransitive - [Latin, TO BE TURNED. Literally, to be turned to or with; to

be turned about.] 1. To keep company; TO ASSOCIATE; to cohabit; TO HOLD
INTERCOURSE and be intimately acquainted; followed by with. For him who lonely loves
to seek the distant hills, and their converse with nature. 2. TO HAVE SEXUAL COMMERCE.
3. To talk familiarly; to have free intercourse in mutual communication of thoughts and

!718
 opinions; to convey thoughts reciprocally; followed by with before the person addressed, and
on before the subject, converse as friend with friend. We have often conversed with each other
on the merit of Milton’s poetry. [This is now the most general use of the word.] - noun - 1.
Conversation; familiar discourse or talk; free interchange of thoughts or opinions. Formed by
thy converse happily to steer from grave to gay, from lively to severe. 2. Acquaintance by
frequent or customary intercourse; cohabitation; FAMILIARITY. In this sense, the word may
include discourse, or not; as, to hold converse with persons of different sects; or to hold
converse with terrestrial things. (Webs1828)

CONVERSATION - noun -1. General course of manners; behavior; deportment;

ESPECIALLY AS IT RESPECTS MORALS. Let your conversation be as becometh the
gospel. Philippians 1:27. Be ye holy in all manner of conversation. 1 Peter 1:15. 2. A
KEEPING COMPANY; FAMILIAR INTERCOURSE; intimate fellowship or
ASSOCIATION; COMMERCE IN SOCIAL LIFE. Knowledge of men and manners is best
acquired by conversation with the best company. 3. Intimate and familiar acquaintance; as a
conversation with books, or other object. 4. Familiar discourse; general intercourse of
sentiments; chat; unrestrained talk; opposed to a formal conference. What I mentioned in
conversation was not a new thought. [This is now the most general use of the word.]
(Webs1828)

DISCOURSE - noun - Discors. [Latin, to run.] 1. The ACT of the UNDERTAKING, BY

WHICH IT PASSES FROM PREMISES TO CONSEQUENCES; the act which connects
propositions, and deduces conclusions from them. [This sense is now obsolete.] 2. Literally, a
running over a subject in speech; hence, a communication of thoughts BY WORDS, either to
individuals, to companies, or to public assemblies. Discourse to an individual or to a small
company is called conversation or talk; mutual interchange or thoughts; mutual intercourse
OF LANGUAGE. It is applied to the familiar communication of thoughts by an individual,
or to the mutual communication of two or more. We say, I was pleased with his discourse and
he heard our discourse. The vanquished party with the victors joined, nor wanted sweet
discourse the banquet of the mind. 3. Effusion of language; speech. 4. A written treatise; a
formal dissertation; as the discourse of Plutarch on garrulity; of Cicero on old age. 5. A
sermon, uttered or written. We say, an extemporaneous discourse or a written discourse. - verb
intransitive - 1. To talk; to converse; but it expresses rather more FORMALITY than talk. He
discoursed with us an hour on the events of the war. We discoursed together on our mutual
concerns. 2. To communicate thoughts or ideas IN A FORMAL MANNER; to treat upon in a
solemn, set manner; as, to discourse on the properties of the circle; the preacher discoursed on
the nature and effects of faith. 3. To reason; TO PASS FROM PREMISES TO
CONSEQUENCES. - verb transitive - To treat of; to talk over; to discuss. [Not used.] Let use
discourse our fortunes. (Webs1828)

—=—

In case this recurring theme of language arts being what constitutes ethnicity hasn’t become clear
in the mind of the reader, it should be understood here that our words and how and in what form
we use them, as the words ofÞciated over by the state, are what creates the character of the person
in any nation. Ethnicity is not a race, it is a language-based national id-entity. Our conformity to the
gods of the nations cannot be accomplished by any other means in the language arts than that of
outright and unhidden slavery. Obviously any tyrant would prefer volunteerism over force,
especially when volunteers agree to such wonderfully forceful legal measures being used
“lawfully” (artfully) upon them, along with the equal “rights” of pain, punishment, taxation, ex-
action and imprisonment. Quite simply, language is the paintbrush that renders and articulates the
false persona, the life-giving word-DNA of the artiÞce. Words. Terms of art. The Þction of syllables
combined in binding nomenclature.

Discourse, intercourse, commerce; these are all the same concepts, and all of them are within the
legal Þction only the actions of Òactors on the state.Ó Everything is a sport; a narrative play, where

!719
the characters function only within their watery engraves like apparitions ßoating over the
untouchable land in that Þgurative realm of spiritual death. It is the inter-course of citizen-ships on
the sea of commerce.

LAKE - verb intransitive - TO PLAY; TO SPORT. North of England. This is play, without a
preÞx. - noun - [Latin lacus. A lake is a stand of WATER, from the root of LAY (LIE). Hence
Latin lagena, Eng. ßagon.] (Webs1828)

FLAGON - noun [Latin lagena; Gr.] A VESSEL with a narrow mouth, used for holding and
conveying liquors. Stay me with ßagons, comfort me with apples; for I am sick of love.
(Webs1828)

LIQUOR - noun- lik'or [Latin liquor] A liquid or FLUID SUBSTANCE. [See LIQUID.] Liquor
is a word of general signiÞcation, extending to WATER, milk, BLOOD, say, juice, etc.; but its
most common application is to spirituous ßuids… (Webs1828)

LIQUID - adjective [Latin liquidus, from liquo, to melt; lix and lug.] 1. Fluid; FLOWING OR
CAPABLE OF FLOWING; NOT FIXED or solid. But liquid is not precisely synonymous with
ßuid. Mercury and air are ßuid, but not liquid. 2. Soft; clear; ßowing; smooth; as liquid
melody. 3. Pronounced without any jar; smooth; as a liquid letter. 4. DISSOLVED; NOT
OBTAINABLE BY LAW; AS A LIQUID DEBT. Obsolete. - noun - 1. A FLUID OR FLOWING
SUBSTANCE; a substance whose parts change their relative position on the slightest
pressure, and which ßows on an inclined plane; as water, wine, milk, etc. (Webs1828)

RECREATION - noun - 1. Refreshment of the strength and spirits after toil; amusement;
DIVERSION. 2. Relief from toil or pain; amusement in sorrow or DISTRESS. (Webs1828)

RE-CREATION - noun - A forming anew. (Webs1828)

FUN - noun - SPORT; VULGAR MERRIMENT. A low word. (Webs1828)

PLAY - verb intransitive - 1. To use any exercise for pleasure or RECREATION; to do

something not as a task or for proÞt, but for amusement; as, to play at cricket. The people sat
down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play. Exodus 32:6. 2. TO SPORT; to frolick; to frisk.
The lamb thy riot dooms to bleed to day, Had he thy reason, would he skip and play? 3. To toy;
TO ACT with levity. 4. TO TRIFLE; TO ACT WANTONLY AND THOUGHTLESSLY. Men
are apt to play with their healths and their lives as they do with their clothes. 5. To do
something fanciful; to give a fanciful turn to; as, to play upon WORDS. 6. To make sport, or
practice sarcastic merriment. I would make use of it rather to play upon those I despise, than
triße with those I love. 7. TO MOCK; TO PRACTICE ILLUSION. Art thou alive, Or is it fancy
plays upon our eyesight? 8. To contend in a game; as, to play at cards or dice; to play for
diversion; to play for money. 9. TO PRACTICE A TRICK OR DECEPTION. His mother
played false with a smith. 10. To perform on an instrument of music; as, to play on a ßute, a
violin or a harpsichord. Play, my friend, and charm the charmer. 11. To move, or TO MOVE
WITH ALTERNATE DILATATION AND CONTRACTION. The heart beats, the blood
circulates, the lungs play. 12. TO OPERATE; TO ACT. The engines play against a Þre. 13. To
move IRREGULARLY; to wanton. Ev'n as the waving sedges play with wind. The setting sun,
Plays on their shining arms and burnish'd helmets. All fame is foreign, but of true desert,
Plays round the head, but comes not to the heart. 14. TO ACT A PART on the stage; TO
PERSONATE A CHARACTER. A lord will hear you play to-night. 15. TO REPRESENT A
STANDING CHARACTER. COURTS ARE THEATERS WHERE SOME MEN PLAY. 16. To
act in any particular character; as, TO PLAY THE FOOL; to play the woman; to play the man.
17. To move in any manner; to move one way and another; as any part of a machine. - verb
transitive - To put in action or motion; as, to play cannon or a Þre-engine. 1. To use an
instrument of music; as, to play the ßute or the organ. 2. TO ACT A SPORTIVE PART OR
CHARACTER. Nature here, Wanton’d as in her prime, and play'd at will. Her virgin fancies. 3.

!720
 To ACT or PERFORM BY REPRESENTING A CHARACTER; as, to play a comedy; to play
the part of king Lear. 4. To act; TO PERFORM; as, to play our parts well ON THE STAGE OF
LIFE. 5. To perform in contest for amusement or for a PRIZE; as, to play a game at whist. To
play off, to display; TO SHOW; TO PUT IN EXERCISE; as, to play off tricks. To play on or
upon, to deceive; to mock or to triße with. 1. To give a fanciful turn to. - noun - Any exercise or
series of actions intended for pleasure, amusement or diversion, as at cricket or quoit, or at
blind man's buff. 1. Amusement; sport; frolic; gambols. Two gentle fawns at play. 2. Game;
gaming; practice of contending for victory, for amusement or for a prize, as at dice, cards or
billiards. 3. PRACTICE in any contest; as sword-play. He was resolved not to speak distinctly,
knowing his best play to be in the dark. John naturally loved rough play. 4. ACTION; USE;
EMPLOYMENT; OFFICE. --But justiÞes the next who comes in play. 5. PRACTICE; action;
manner of acting in contest or negotiation; as fair play; foul play. 6. A dramatic composition; a
comedy or tragedy; a composition in which characters are represented by dialogue and
action. A play ought to be a just image of human nature. 7. Representation or exhibition of a
comedy or tragedy; as, to be at the play. He attends every play. 8. Performance on an
instrument of music. 9. Motion; movement, regular or irregular; as the play of a wheel or
piston. 10. State of agitation or discussion. Many have been sav'd, and many may, Who never
heard this question brought in play. 11. Room for motion. The joints are let exactly into one
another, that they have no play between them. 12. LIBERTY OF ACTING; room for
enlargement or display; scope; as, to give full play to mirth. Let the genius have free play.
(Webs1828)

SPORT - noun - 1. That which DIVERTS and makes merry; PLAY; game; diversion; also,
mirth. The word signiÞes both the cause and the effect; that which produces mirth, and the
mirth or merriment produced. Her sports were such as carried riches of knowledge upon the
stream of delight. Here the word denotes the cause of amusement. They called Samson out of
the prison-house; and he made them sport. Judges 16:25. Here sport is the effect. 2. Mock;
mockery; contemptuous mirth. Then make sport at me, then let me be your jest. They made a
sport of his prophets. 3. THAT WITH WHICH ONE PLAYS, OR WHICH IS DRIVEN
ABOUT. To ßitting leaves, the sport of every wind. NEVER DOES MAN APPEAR TO
GREATER DISADVANTAGE THAN WHEN HE IS THE SPORT OF HIS OWN
UNGOVERNED PASSIONS. 4. Play; idle jingle. An author who should introduce such a
sport of words upon our stage, would meet with small applause. 5. Diversion of the Þeld, as
fowling, hunting, Þshing. In sport. To do a thing in sport is to do it IN JEST, FOR PLAY OR
DIVERSION. So is the man that deceiveth his neighbor, and saith, am not I in sport? Proverbs
26:19. - verb transitive - 1. To divert; to make merry; used with the reciprocal pronoun. Against
whom do ye sport yourselves? Isaiah 47:1. 2. TO REPRESENT BY ANY KIND OF PLAY.
Now sporting on thy lyre the love of youth. - verb intransitive - 1. To play; to frolick; to
wanton. See the brisk lambs that sport along the mead. 2. To triße. THE MAN THAT
LAUGHS AT RELIGION SPORTS WITH HIS OWN SALVATION. (Webs1828)

AMUSE - verb transitive - s as z. [Gr. and Latin musso.] 1. To entertain the mind AGREEABLY;
TO OCCUPY OR DETAIN ATTENTION WITH AGREEABLE OBJECTS, whether by
singing, conversation, or a show of curiosities. Dr. Johnson remarks, that amuse implies
something less lively than divert, and less important than please. Hence it is often said, we are
amused with trißes. 2. TO DETAIN; TO ENGAGE the attention BY HOPE OR
EXPECTATION; as, to amuse one BY FLATTERING PROMISES. (Webs1828)

AMUSEMENT - noun - s as z. That which amuses, DETAINS OR ENGAGES THE MIND;

ENTERTAINMENT OF THE MIND; pastime; a pleasurable occupation of the SENSES, or
that which furnishes it, as dancing, sports or music. (Webs1828)

—=—

To overuse the analogy, we can compare the life of a man acting in agency and persona to that of a
man wasting his time playing the game of Monopoly. The character as master of his commercial

!721
game-piece (person/ship) goes round and round in a circuitry, circulating another’s money and
paying tax each time it circulates to its owner (the state). Along the way, we have the opportunity
to collect paper titles that show we are the registered owners (users) of some part of the land on
that board, but it is only paper. For at the end of the day, the money all goes back to the bank
because it cannot be spent in any other place except in that Þctional game, the jurisdiction of the
legal sport of human capital management, the very international model of the modern company
store. The board game folds up just like paper. And those apparent titles to property never actually
belonged to us anyway, only to the game-piece (legal person) of the Þctional game. In the end, we
have wasted our Þctionally driven lives in the game, playing the part of fakery as actors while
believing we acquired inherent wealth, when in Reality we had nothing to inherit and pass on
except debt. We languish away our lives and that of our children within the trißing amusements of
the game-master. Even when the winning game-piece (person) collects more than the other players
and apparently wins the game, the player doesn’t actually win anything except pieces of paper
(false titles) showing tenancy in a feudalistic stage play; evidence of rent of the lands of the modern
feudalistic landholders that created the game we play. Everything in the Þction is but a trißing
diversion. And each of us has been recreated as but a triße.

TRIFLE - noun - A thing of very little value or importance; a word applicable to any thing
and every thing of this CHARACTER. With such poor trißes playing. Moments make the
year, and trißes, life. Trißes, Are to the jealous CONFIRMATIONS strong. - verb intransitive -
TO ACT OR TALK WITHOUT SERIOUSNESS, GRAVITY, WEIGHT OR DIGNITY; to act
or talk with levity. They triße and they beat the air about nothing which toucheth us. 1. To
indulge in light amusements. To triße with, to mock; to play the fool with; to treat without
respect or seriousness. To triße with, TO SPEND IN VANITY; to waste. To triße away, to no
good purpose; as, to triße with time, or to triße away time; to triße with advantages. - verb
transitive - To make of no importance. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

DIVERT - verb transitive [Latin, to turn.] 1. TO TURN OFF FROM ANY COURSE, direction
or intended application; to turn aside; as, to divert a river from its usual channel; TO
DIVERT COMMERCE FROM ITS USUAL COURSE; to divert appropriated money to other
objects; TO DIVERT A MAN FROM HIS PURPOSE. 2. To turn the mind from business or
study; hence, TO PLEASE; TO AMUSE; TO ENTERTAIN; to exhilarate. Children are
diverted with sports; men are diverted with works of wit and humor; low minds are diverted
with buffoonery in stage-playing. 3. TO DRAW THE FORCES OF AN ENEMY TO A
DIFFERENT POINT. 4. TO SUBVERT… (Webs1828)

DRY - adjective [See the Verb.] 1. Destitute of moisture; free from water or wetness; arid; not
moist; as dry land; dry clothes… 7. Barren; jejune; plain; unembellished; DESTITUTE OF
PATHOS, OR OF THAT WHICH AMUSES AND INTERESTS; as a dry style; a dry subject; a
dry discussion… - verb transitive - [G., to dry, to wipe; Gr., Latin, See dry. The primary sense is
to wipe, rub, scour.] 1. TO FREE FROM WATER, or from moisture of any kind, and by any
means; originally by wiping, as to dry the eyes; to exsiccate… (Webs1828)

PATHOS - noun - [Gr. TO SUFFER.] Passion; warmth or vehemence, in a speaker; or in

language, that which excites emotions and passions. (Webs1828)

—=—

A private citizen with private land has no pathos attached to his land. It is dry. It is not of the water.

A public citizenship with public land has pathos attached to his land. It is wet (wed). It is of the
water.

It is an understatement to say that the masses of men in the American continent and indeed around
the world have been diverted, that their pathos and strength of masculine force have been
redirected and degraded (cast-rated) instead towards all forms of sport, to stage-plays and their

!722
modern versions in movies and television, and by the most terribly low humor of sitcoms, dramas
and comedians. Man serves no purpose except that of either the state or its taxable persona (status)
and estate in usufruct. The fruit of his labor is seedless, bearing no Living heirs, consisting only of
debt and dead things. And collectively, this imposed idiocracy has certainly brought the power of
the masses to a point not dissimilar to the citizens of Rome in their debauchery and love of the
colosseums, that perfection of a system of distraction and diversion now perhaps attaining the
status of the number one industry in America.

The parable of the ant and the grasshopper comes to mind here. In the end, after entertaining
himself with all manner of amusing diversions in the summer, the grasshopper starves in the
winter months even after the ant warned him to prepare for the coming cold famine.

Ultimately these proverbs may be difÞcult to grasp, and so we pass them on without
comprehension. This is a fear tactic. The fool embraces his fear and ignorance as his understanding,
standing under its authority and under those who harness it in their artful systems of Þction,
whereas the wise man desires knowledge and righteously seeks it in fear of God; the fear of not
understanding God’s self-evident and always permanent Nature and Law. And so the difference
between the unregenerate fool and the righteous believer (lover and doer of the Word) is only their
use of their own fear. It either drowns a man in under-standing as it does the goyim in the
citizenship of nations, or it frees a man to hate that dead state of artiÞce for fear of GodÕs Nature
and Law. The fool lives in darkness for fear of being without it, while the wise man Lives in the
Light for fear of Living without It. The wise man understands what is the verb Jehovah in Oneness
and knows the self-evidence of scripture without false-hoods and despite his own temptations and
wants, remaining only in fulÞllment of his actual needs, for to desire and fall prey to the Þction of
artiÞce is to under-stand only evil. To need like an ad-diction what is Þctional is the sign and mark
of satan (that which is adversarial to Reality, Nature, and Life Itself).

—=—

“IT IS AS SPORT TO A FOOL TO DO MISCHIEF: but a man of

understanding hath wisdom. The fear of the wicked, it (understanding)
shall come upon him: but the desire of the righteous shall be granted.
As the whirlwind passeth, so is the wicked no more: but the righteous is
an everlasting foundation.”
—Proverbs 10:23, KJB

—=—

“These (Christianity/Judaism) are two ways of life, each utterly alien to

the other. Each has its place in the world — but they cannot ßourish in
the same soil, they cannot remain in contact without antagonism.
Though to life itself each way is a perfect utterance, TO EACH OTHER
THEY ARE ENEMIES.”

“Sport is for you a serious SPIRITUAL matter. It is the proper

symbolization, the perfect ritual, wherein your spiritual forces, Þnding
expression, also Þnd exercise and sustenance.Ó

!723
 “The most amazing thing in your life, the most in contrast with ours, is
its sport. By this I do not mean simply your fondness for physical
exercise, your physical exuberance, but the PSYCHOLOGICAL and
SOCIAL INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF SPORT, its organization, its
predominant role AS THE OUTLET AND EXPRESSION OF YOUR
SPIRITUAL ENERGIES.”

“YOUR SPIRIT IS SPORT: particularly your young men, who are not
yet absorbed in the struggle for existence, and whose emotions are
therefore for the largest part FREE, must Þnd in sport, in games, in
contests, the most satisfactory expression of their instincts.”

“The contention of the majority of your educators, THAT THE MORAL

INSTINCT IS TRAINED ON THE FOOTBALL AND BASEBALL
FIELD, in boxing, rowing, wrestling and other contests, is a true one, is
truer, perhaps, than most of them realize. YOUR IDEAL MORALITY IS
A SPORTING MORALITY. The intense discipline of the game, the
spirit of fair play, the qualities of endurance, of good humor, of
conventionalized seriousness in effort, of loyalty, of struggle without
malice or bitterness, OF READINESS TO FORGET LIKE A SPORT —
all these are brought out in their sheerest and cleanest starkness in well-
organized and closely regulated college sports. AND ON THE
EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS WHICH THESE SPORTS IMPLY
YOUR ENTIRE SPIRITUAL LIFE IS INEVITABLY FOUNDED.”
—Maurice Samuel, from: ‘You Gentiles,’ 1924, separate quotes

—=—

The false Jew, that for what the Bible calls as the “synagogue of satan,” so full of Zionist pretenders
in religious name only, and just as the typical ÒChristianÓ feigns his or her own false and ßattering
title, has control of the gentiles (goyim) of the nations just as the Roman Caesars (Tzars) did,
through various outlets of sport. They make rules which in their private capacities they do not and
are not required to follow, but penalize us for not following them. Every aspect of the legal society
is of sport, even its systems of so-called justice. Judges are referees.

In poles, the most popular daytime sporting event on television is in fact the “Judge Judy” show,
where viewers root and cheer for the winner and loser of that false show of justice. This spells the
ridiculousness and foolish nature of our collective idiocracy, a cultural difference so vast so as to be
night and day compared to our controllers. We are a conquered people, purchased by so many
sporting inducements and controlled (governed) by the ignorance necessary to embrace them as
more important than our own place in Jehovah. Again, this is not actual religion. This is a class
structure that pretends to be religions. This is public vs. private, the owners of the team versus the
players and spectators.

!724
 SPECTATOR - noun - [Latin whence] 1. One that looks on; one that sees or beholds; a
beholder; as the spectators of the show. 2. ONE PERSONALLY PRESENT. The spectators
were numerous. (Webs1828)

PLAYER - noun - One who plays in any game or sport. 1. AN IDLER. 2. AN ACTOR OF
DRAMATIC SCENES; ONE WHOSE OCCUPATION IS TO IMITATE CHARACTERS ON
THE STAGE. 3. A MIMIC. 4. ONE WHO PERFORMS ON AN INSTRUMENT of music. 5. A
gamester. 6. One that ACTS A PART in a certain manner. (Webs1828)

—=—

This word behold comes from the Latin servo, meaning “to keep.” In other words, the spectator and
the player are beholden to the master of the ceremony they so love (believe in) as Reality. Like pets
kept occupied by toys, we are kept entranced by Þctional performances of a competitive nature. We
are kept separate by this competitive fever, a contracted dis-ease that prevents our Oneness and
mutual Love and Charity towards one another. This is the Judaizing and Romanization of True
christianity. For the false Jew follows not the Bible but the Talmud as his law. If the reader has not
read the Talmud then he cannot know what True evil is nor how the typical “Christian” is con-
trolled by its tenets and controllers. And though you will judge me and call myself as the author of
this work by the false titles assigned for you to use in sport (judgement) by the very masters that
have fooled us all, the Truth stands immune from such carefully placed fallacies. The master al-
ways teaches his slave to protect the name of his master. This is certainly written and warned about
in the Bible, that we should fall so deeply under that strong delusion of the Pharisees (hypocrites).
Talmudist thought is akin to Zionism, and Zionism is akin to national patriotism. The Talmudic,
corporate “Jewish” Zionist friend of a corporate “Christian” is as a sheep accepting a wolf in
sheep’s clothing simply because the very source and structure (law) of that obviously false costume
is ignored. Remember, the Jewish name of God is I AM THAT I AM. No man of God would claim to
be I AM “Jewish” or “Christian” so as to separate one people (blood) from another. One cannot be
respected as Purely the I Am without only respecting all others as the same and without exception,
to do unto others as you would have them to do unto you, and to see and respect no Þction. Only a
Þction may see and in-jure other Þctions, just as a cartoon may only interact with others of its kind,
and only at the will of the men who cause it to be Þctionally animated. Such false titles have no
place in this spiritual philosophy and Highest of Law. For Truly, this is the Natural, negative Law of
God. And just as the followers of christ (the Word) are instructed to hate false religion, so too is the
follower of the Jewish Torah to hate these sects of false “Jews” who follow another doctrine by
corrupt men. The self-evident Truth is never of the source of any of man’s writings and doctrines.
The people of Israel are Real, not merely some citizens of some legal “state” or nation upon a map
Þctionally called as ÒIsrael.Ó

The word Israel from StrongÕs H3478 - Yisra’el - means “God prevails” and “contender or soldier of
God.” As a Real People, this name (noun) was used to describe a genuine people that were in the
favor of God, not because of their special birth and bloodlines but because of their respect of that
Law of God. It was their collective disrespect as a false legal entity, when the noun (name) became
empty as the name of a corporation nation (artiÞcial person) and personal responsibility and duty
was replaced by legal licensure, that they were exiled in their Babylonian woe. Today as then they
followed the Pharisees and became as hypocrites to their own Highest Law, just as the Popish
“Christians” have been so fooled and misled. This word Yisra’el comes from its root words of
Strong's H8280 - sarah - meaning to place in order or in a row, a series, as to be noble and
princelike, and also to be warlike and contend, have power, contend with, persist, exert oneself,
and to preserve; and from Strong's H410 - 'el - meaning god or god-like, as MEN OF RANK or OF
HIGH PLACES, angels, false gods and demons, imaginations, OR OF GOD AS THE ONE TRUE
GOD, WHICH CAUSE MEN TO BE MIGHTY THINGS IN NATURE AND TO HAVE
STRENGTH AND POWER, as mighty heroes.


As with all words, we Þnd again the typical dualism of Reality and Þction, of Law and false
doctrines, of God and false gods, and of false status and rank in empty name only. Verb (actions/

!725
works) vs. noun (name/title). The Israelite, also mistakenly called as the modern term “jew,” is no
exception to this rule. The man of God is either genuine or he is artiÞcial, just as the false, ßattering
titles of “Christian” and “Muslim.” And He either stands in warlike protectionism of His Free and
Lawful way and path of Life or He succumbs to manÕs Þctions in opposition to His True intent and
Real piety.

The fool will choose and literally insist upon this word Israel to have been an actual man born
within the fabled genealogy of the Old Testament, believing in the personiÞed history instead of
the parabolic wisdom and nature of the story. For in the Bible scriptures the personiÞcation of this
word is told to be the second name for Jacob, given to him by God after his wrestling with the
angel at Peniel. It is also the name of the descendants and the nation of the descendants of Jacob,
the name of the northern kingdom consisting of the 10 tribes under Jeroboam, of which the
southern kingdom was named as Judah. Finally, it is the name of that nation after the return from
exile. We believe (love) the name over the meaning of the word that is turned into that name (i.e.,
literalism), assigning it false authority over the Reality or Þction it represents. And so, like the
modern fake nobility and recently invented people called “Jewish” that relies solely on one’s
genealogy and the names of descendants (bloodlines) for one’s place and rank in the false legal
“state” and society for the “right of return” into a purely false legal state and jurisdiction under
false gods named but not acting as “Israel,” the tenets and Laws (Son) of God are completely lost.
The Þgurative blood of christ is replaced by fables and mythos of long dead men with ßattering
titles and personiÞed teaching tools of the scriptures (ancient knowledge). The propaganda is so
strong through the Judaized Hollywood superstructure and false evangelism of television pirates
that even the modern and misled, Judiazed “Christians” hold this invented people as the higher
“chosen” people of God today, simply because they were born that way and for no other reason.
This is patently ridiculous, and is nothing if not the mentality of a slave-race (goyim). The shoe
certainly Þts.

Jewishness, as the teachings of the false, universal church of “Christianity,” is a learned behavior. It
is personal control according to a chosen law other than harmony with God’s Natural Oneness as
moral Self-control. All men may become as the sons of God, as the Bible instructs, but only when
the Old Law is fulÞlled with the New.

To the commonalty of citizen-ships of the nations of goyim under their mind-control (govern-
ment), our christian religion (as part of the common law) has been reduced to sport, a mere false
show and part played and acted out for other spectators every Sunday morning. Instead of Living
in God we play the dead parts of a legal script as if socially obligated once a week while playing
also the referee (judge) of our fellow actors. We spectate not in Love and careful concern but in
competition and contempt.

Whom among us can deny this?

Organized, ÒprofessionalÓ sports is perhaps the best example of the satanic pursuit of Þction, be it
in entertainment or in politics and religion. For despite all the hype, money spent, and preparation
for the touted sporting event, in the end nothing actually happens. Nothing is actually accomplish-
ed. The entirety of the actions of all involved added up to absolutely nothing and it is forgotten
almost as soon as it is over, reduced to a statistical entry in some false history book. Is it any
wonder that the most protected and well-funded outlet of the education and university system is
their sports franchises? Is it any wonder that brilliant minds are left to waste away while sports
players are granted scholarships? Think about that for a moment…

It is very difÞcult to alter one's perceptions from literal interpretations that describe Reality into
these legal, Þgurative, and metaphorical considerations both in a spiritually parabolic form and
inversely in so much adversarial and deceptive artfulness. But in order to comprehend the big lie,
which just happens to be, commercially speaking, the nonspiritual great ßood of virtual (legal) water
over all of Reality and Nature in the legal sense, we must start thinking like the wolves and not like
the sheep we have allowed ourselves to become. We must think like the shepherd we choose to

!726
follow. We must Þrst admit defeat by all of these sporting diversions before we may overcome the
suffocating effects of that unseen commercial water in trickery. For the land is covered by an in-
visible, legal sea (holy see), and so man must of course be assigned a commercial ship (vessel) as a
commercial personhood to navigate that international commercial sea. And so within this
Þgurative ßood, we must comprehend that water is not legally the same as land, and that
commercial things of the water (imperfect titles) cannot be owned or held outright, for water is
always public in nature, never able to be held privately. There is no perfect title to water. A public
persona can only use the water, never hold or own it, for its ßow must not be interrupted by
private concerns. It will always slip and escape through the artiÞcial (dead) hands of legal persons.
And so all property held under the public law of the sea (commerce) is common and is thus
national property of the public, which means that all commercial things are property of the public
district created by the actual (but long dead) bloodline of incorporated ÒPeopleÓ through its
contracted government in trust. A strawman can inherit no tenements, and thus cannot pass on any
true inheritance to his kin. No blood, no heirÉ For, as the maxim states, God alone makes the heir, not
man. When manÕs god is government, government remakes and diverts the capacity of the heir into
the public forum, causing him to believe that the commercially aliened paper deed and title is the
actual land, and not just a piece of worthless (in Nature) legal paper.

An element of water controls an element of land only because the land cannot absorb the water.
The sea incapacitates the soil, by charging and covering it with legal title. And the high water mark
that for obvious reasons sits upon the highest mountains declares the vast extent of the legal,
virtual ßood, limiting the higher use of the land by describing the land as a victim of the
commercial tide. Either the water is damned (barred) by their land elements (immovable heirs) or
the water ßoods and thus covers the land so that only commercial vessels (citizen-ships/movable
chattel) may engage upon it in usufruct. But the ship may never Þnd land until the man sailing it
docks, thus ending the binding relation-ship and ad-venture between man and this legal,
commercial vessel. A man of God needs no ship, for he can walk over the water as christ did,
without sinking or getting wet (wed). Christ was immune from commerce. For he respected no
person, and so he needed no ship. He never sank or fell into the Þction of man.

DOCK - Éverb transitive - 1. To cut off, as the end of a thing; to curtail; to cut short; to clip;
as, to dock the tail of a horse. 2. To cut off a part; to shorten; to deduct from; as, to dock an
account. 3. To cut off, DESTROY OR DEFEAT; TO BAR; AS, TO DOCK AN ENTAIL. 4. To
bring, draw or PLACE A SHIP IN A DOCK. (Webs1828)

QUIT - adjective - Clear; DISCHARGED; FREE; also spoken of persons absolved or acquitted
of a charge. - verb - In conveyancing. TO RELEASE OR RELINQUISH A CLAIM; TO
EXECUTE a deed of quitclaim. (Black4)

QUITCLAIM - noun - A release or acquittance given to one man by another, in respect of

any action that he has or might have against him. Also ACQUITTING OR GIVING UP
ONE'S CLAIM OR TITLE. (Black4)

QUITCLAIM - verb transitive - [quit and claim.] TO RELEASE A CLAIM BY DEED

WITHOUT COVENANTS OF WARRANTY; to convey to another who hath some right in
lands or tenements, ALL ONE'S RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST IN THE ESTATE, BY
RELINQUISHING ALL CLAIM TO THEM. The words used in the instrument are, 'A hath
REMISED, RELEASED AND FOREVER QUITCLAIMED ALL HIS RIGHT, title and
interest to a certain estate.' - noun - A deed of RELEASE; an instrument by which ALL
CLAIMS TO AN ESTATE ARE RELINQUISHED TO ANOTHER WITHOUT ANY
COVENANT OR WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. (Webs1828)

—=—

!727
We must quit claiming to be something that we are not, to be property of another. We must be no
thing. We must dock the ship assigned to us for the purposes of acting in commercial Þction as a
public citizen so as to become private. We must discharge our undertaking by bringing it to an end,
by executing the contractual relation-ship and bringing Þnal solution, as the end of all of those
devil’s contracts.

But before we can do that, we must comprehend and understand just what has been enjoined and
entailed to our persons. We must admit to our slave status in agency before we can end it.
Acknowledgement of defeat must happen before our Natural Freedom from it may be attained.

And so just what is an entail and fee?

ENTAIL - verb - To settle or LIMIT THE SUCCESSION TO REAL PROPERTY; to create an

estate tail. - noun - A FEE abridged or limited to THE ISSUE, OR CERTAIN CLASSES OF
ISSUE, INSTEAD OF DESCENDING TO ALL THE HEIRS. Entail, in legal treatises, is used
to signify an estate tail, especially with reference to THE RESTRAINT WHICH SUCH AN
ESTATE IMPOSES UPON ITS OWNER, or, in other words, the points wherein such an
estate differs from an estate in fee-simple. And this is often its popular sense; but sometimes
it is, in popular language, used differently, so as to signify a succession of life-estates, as
when it is said that “an entail ends with A.,” meaning that A. is the Þrst person who is
entitled to bar or cut off the entail, being in law THE FIRST TENANT, IN TAIL.

Break or Bar an Entail - TO FREE AN ESTATE FROM THE LIMITATIONS IMPOSED

BY AN ENTAIL, and permit its free disposition, anciently by means of a Þne or common
recovery, BUT NOW BY DEED IN WHICH THE TENANT AND NEXT HEIR JOIN.

Quasi Entail - An estate pur autre vie may be granted, not only to a man and his heirs, but
to a man and the heirs of his body, which is termed a "quasi entail;" the interest so
granted not being properly an estate-tail (for the statute De Donis applies only where the
subject of the entail is an estate of inheritance), but yet so far in the nature of an estate-tail
that it will go to the heir of the body as special occupant during the life of the cestui que
vie, in the same manner as an estate of inheritance would descend, if limited to the
grantee and the heirs of his body. (Black4)

ENTAILED - Settled or limited TO SPECIFIED HEIRS, or IN TAIL. (Black4)

ENTAILED MONEY - Money directed to be invested in realty to be entailed. (Black4)

ENTAILMENT - AN INTERFERENCE WITH AND CURTAILMENT OF THE ORDINARY

RULES PERTAINING TO DEVOLUTION BY INHERITANCE; a limitation and direction by
which property is TO DESCEND DIFFERENT FROM THE COURSE WHICH IT WOULD
TAKE if the creator of the entailment, grantor or testator, had been content that the estate
should devolve in regular and general succession TO HEIRS AT LAW in the statutory order
of precedence and sequence. (Black4)

EN - IN. (Webs1828)

TAIL - Limited; abridged; reduced; curtailed, AS A FEE OR ESTATE IN FEE, TO A

CERTAIN ORDER OF SUCCESSION, OR TO CERTAIN HEIRS. (Black4)

ESTATE IN TAIL - An estate OF INHERITANCE, which, instead of descending to heirs

generally, goes to the heirs of the done & body, which means his lawful issue, his children,
and through them to his grandchildren IN A DIRECT LINE, SO LONG AS HIS
POSTERITY ENDURES IN A REGULAR ORDER AND COURSE OF DESCENT, and upon
the death of the Þrst owner without issue, the estate DETERMINES. A FREEHOLD OF
INHERITANCE, limited to a person AND THE HEIRS OF HIS BODY, general or special,

!728
 male or female, and is the creature of the statute de Donas. The estate, provided the entail be
not BARRED, REVERTS TO THE DONOR OR REVERSIONER, IF THE DONEE DIE
WITHOUT LEAVING DESCENDANTS ANSWERING TO THE CONDITION ANNEXED
TO THE ESTATE UPON ITS CREATION, unless there be a limitation over to A THIRD
PERSON on default of such descendants, when it vests in such third person or remainder-
man.

Several Tail - An entail severally to two; as if land is given to two men and their wives,
and to the heirs of their bodies begotten; here the donees have a joint estate for their two
lives, and yet they have a several inheritance, because the issue of the one shall have his
moiety, and the issue of the other, the other moiety.

Tail after Possibility of Issue Extinct - A species of estate tail which arises where one is
tenant in special tail, and a person from whose body the issue was to spring DIES
WITHOUT ISSUE, OR, HAVING LEFT ISSUE, THAT ISSUE BECOMES EXTINCT. In
either of these cases the surviving tenant in special tail becomes "tenant in tail after
possibility of issue extinct.”

Tail General - An estate in tail granted to one "and the heirs of his body begotten," which
is called "tail general" because, how often soever such donee in tail be married, his issue
in general by all and every such marriage is, in successive order, capable of inheriting
the estate tail per formam doni. This is where an estate is limited to a man and the heirs of
his body, WITHOUT ANY RESTRICTION AT ALL; or, according to some authorities,
with no other restriction than that in relation to sex. Thus, tail male general is the same
thing as tail male; the word "general," in such case, implying that there is no other
restriction upon the descent of the estate than that it must go in the male line. So an
estate in tail female general is an estate in tail female. The word "general," in the phrase,
expresses a purely NEGATIVE idea, and may denote THE ABSENCE OF ANY
RESTRICTION, OR THE ABSENCE OF SOME GIVEN RESTRICTION WHICH IS
TACITLY UNDERSTOOD.

Tail Male - When certain lands are given to a person and the male heirs of his or her
body. The female heirs are not capable of inheriting it.

Tail Special - This denotes an estate in tail where the succession is restricted to certain
heirs of the donee's body, and does not go to all of them in general; e.g., where lands and
tenements are given to a man and "the heirs of his body on Mary, his now wife, to be
begotten;" here no issue can inherit but such special issue as is engendered between
those two, not such as the husband may have by another wife, and therefore it is called
"special tail." It is deÞned by Cowell as the limitation of lands and tenements to a man
and his wife AND THE HEIRS OF THEIR TWO BODIES. But the phrase need not be
thus restricted. Tail special, in its largest sense, is where THE GIFT IS RESTRAINED
TO CERTAIN HEIRS OF THE DONOR'S BODY, AND DOES NOT GO TO ALL OF
THEM IN GENERAL. (Black4)

—=—

What does it mean in law that an estate can be determined?

We need to understand that the only way anything can be determined, including our person
(status) at law and any property or lands attached to it, is if that thing is Þctional. That which is
self-evident need not be determined. Only the paper representation of the person, place, or thing
can be determined. In other words, only that which is the slave of a master and the agent of a
principal can be determined. Only gods have the power to determine anything under their
established, de facto (illegitimate in Nature) law. And the only man immune from such judicial,
legal determinations of his land and property, including his children, is a private man of God. For
his agency is only to the Principal Creator of all Nature, and his Law is Highest.

!729
But the land-lords certainly have the power through their government agencies to determine the
property of their subjects, especially when man is tricked by them into abandoning his children at
birth. For through the legal birth process, the motive for the act of procreation of children is tainted
and legally misguided. It is made pointless in the eyes of the corruption that is man’s law, and the
birth is only considered as a burden to the state. The birth is a crime, the legal child a felon, and the
citizen-ship a penal punishment of invisible legal chains in an open-air prison for debtors. Evils
such as abortion (population control) are thus medically suggested and approved, for no heir is
needed by the goyim (voluntary slaves) of the state. Every action of every debtor is one of talliage,
as that which is required to be accounted for (to the IRS) and taxed for use by its principal holder.
Every action man takes in the person of another, and every property he might obtain, is wholly
subject to the determination of his principal in agency.

DETER - To discourage or stop BY FEAR, to stop or prevent from acting or proceeding BY

DANGER, difÞculty, or other consideration WHICH DISHEARTENS OR COUNTERVAILS
THE MOTIVE FOR THE ACT. (Black4)

DETERMINE - To come to an end. To bring to an end. To bring to a conclusion, TO SETTLE

BY AUTHORITATIVE SENTENCE, TO DECIDE. TO ADJUDICATE ON AN ISSUE
PRESENTED. To estimate. To decide, and analogous to “adopt” or “accept.”(Black4)

DETERMINATION - The decision of a court of justice. It implies an ending or Þnality, the

ending of a controversy or suit. THE ENDING OR EXPIRATION OF AN ESTATE OR
INTEREST IN PROPERTY, OR OF A RIGHT, POWER, OR AUTHORITY. The coming to an
END IN ANY WAY WHATEVER. Also, an estimate. As respects an assessment, the term
implies judgment and decision after weighing the facts; not mere arithmetical computation.
(Black4)

DETERMINATION OF WILL - A phrase used of the PUTTING AN END TO AN ESTATE

AT WILL. (Black4)

DETERMINABLE - LIABLE TO COME TO AN END UPON THE HAPPENING OF A

CERTAIN CONTINGENCY. SUSCEPTIBLE OF BEING DETERMINED, FOUND out,
deÞnitely decided upon, or settled. As to determinable "Fee" and "Freehold," see those titles.
(Black4)

—=—

This state of feudal tenure in tenancy is the standard operating procedure of all public citizen-ships,
which cannot hold land perfectly, and may only rent the lands of another with permission. This fee
as it was called, which was said to be in tail or entailed, is the same state of false, empty owner-ship
that we exercise under the lord-ship of our masters today. We pay the People tribute through their
created legal entities and municipal corporations. For we only occupy our homes and our lands
through agency and in a legal, public person, and are not allowed to obtain perfect or simple
(patent of allodial) title while acting in the persons (ships) of the foreign United States. Foreigners,
regarded as public persons, cannot inherit land, thus they cannot be holders of land. A United
States citizen is never an heir, never being considered to hold the inheritable blood of the posterity
that stands in perpetuity as the heirs at law of that bloodline.

TAILLE - French. In old English law. The fee which is OPPOSED TO FEE-SIMPLE, because
it is so minced or pared that IT IS NOT IN THE OWNER'S FREE POWER TO DISPOSE OF
IT, but it is, by the Þrst giver, cut or divided from all other, and TIED TO THE ISSUE OF
THE DONEE, — in short, AN ESTATE-TAIL. In old French law. A tax or assessment levied
by the king, or by any great lord, upon his SUBJECTS, usually taking the form of AN
IMPOSITION UPON THE OWNERS OF REAL ESTATE. The equivalent of the English
TILLAGE, the typical DIRECT TAX in France of the Middle Ages, as tonlieu was the generic
term for AN INDIRECT TAX. See Tallage. (Black4)

!730
 TAILAGE - See Tallage. (Black4)

TAILZIE - In Scotch law. AN ENTAIL. A tailzied FEE is that which THE OWNER, BY
EXERCISING HIS INHERENT RIGHT OF DISPOSING of his property, SETTLES upon
others than those to whom it would have descended BY LAW. (Black4)

HEIR IN TALZIE - Scotch law. Heirs of talzie or tailzie, are heirs of estates entailed.
(Bouv1856)

TALLAGE, or TAILAGE - A piece cut out of the whole. USED METAPHORICALLY for A
SHARE OF A MAN'S SUBSTANCE paid by way of TRIBUTE, TOLL, OR TAX, being
derived from the French "tuiller," which signiÞes TO CUT A PIECE OUT OF THE WHOLE. A
term used to denote subsidies, TAXES, customs, and, indeed, ANY IMPOSITION
WHATEVER BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF RAISING A REVENUE.
SMUGGLING, etc. A TAX UPON CITIES, TOWNSHIPS AND BOROUGHS granted to the
king as a part of THE ROYAL REVENUE. (Black4)

TALLAGER - A tax or toll gatherer; mentioned by Chaucer (and spelled “talaigier"). (Black4)

TALLAGIUM - L. Latin. A term including ALL TAXES. (Black4)

TALLAGIUM FACERE - To give up accounts in the exchequer, where the method of

accounting was by tallies. (Black4)

TALLATIO - A keeping account by tallies. (Black4)

TALLIA - L. Latin. A tax or tribute; TALLAGE; a share taken or cut out of any one's
INCOME OR MEANS. (Black4)

TALLEY, or TALLY - A stick cut into two parts, on each whereof is MARKED, with notches
or otherwise, WHAT IS DUE BETWEEN DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. It was the ancient
mode of KEEPING ACCOUNTS. One part was held by the creditor, and the other by the
debtor. The use of tallies in the exchequer was abolished… and the old tallies were ordered to
be destroyed… By the custom of London, SEALED TALLIES WERE EFFECTUAL AS A
DEED. They are admissible by the French and Italian Codes as evidence between traders. It is
said that they were negotiable.

Tallies of loan - A term originally used in England to describe exchequer bills, which
were issued by the ofÞcers of the exchequer when a temporary loan was necessary to
meet the exigencies of the government, and charged on the credit of the exchequer in
general, and made ASSIGNABLE FROM ONE PERSON TO ANOTHER.

Tally trade - A system of dealing by which dealers furnish certain articles on credit,
upon AN AGREEMENT FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE STIPULATED PRICE BY
CERTAIN WEEKLY OR MONTHLY INSTALLMENTS. (Black4)

—=—

The tally trade was merely replaced by the modern mortgage and property tax scheme. But the
creditor, despite his methods, has always been there like a vampire feeding on the common goy
like a wolf upon sheep.

If a piece of the whole is severed, cut out to an individual for the purposes of taxation and fee, then
the whole cannot be considered in “allodial” perfection, or perfection of title. It is alienated;
defective. It can however be patented, which is equivalent to the feudal notion of fee simple, as the
highest title available to private citizens of any several (private) State. To be in citizen-ship is to be

!731
in every possible way within a state of defective incompleteness, of expectancy, of tenancy and rent
only, as only a part of a greater thing and thus in a state of incompleteness and corruption. The
citizen-ship never ends its journey and it has no goal, for it may never Þnd perfected title to land. It
may never establish its own private castle, for no legal capacity for privacy exists within such a
public persona. Its only purpose is to commercially support the landholders that govern it for proÞt
through their own agents called “governments.” For these heirs of the bloodlines, however, the
perfection of land is the only goal. Land is the only real wealth. But holding that land is only the
privilege of those creator gods and the heirs of their own posterity. The dread pirate never allows
his employed crew to own their own ship. (See epilogue of this Volume for complete explanation of
allodial land and patenting of title.)

ALLODIAL - adjective - Pertaining to allodium; freehold; FREE OF RENT OR SERVICE;

HELD INDEPENDENT OF A LORD paramount; OPPOSED TO FEUDAL. (Black4)

ALLODIUM - noun - Freehold estate; land which is the ABSOLUTE PROPERTY OF THE
OWNER; real estate held in absolute independence, without being subject to any rent,
service, OR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO A SUPERIOR. It is thus OPPOSED TO FEUD. In
England, there is no allodial land, all land being held of the king; BUT IN THE UNITED
STATES, MOST LANDS ARE ALLODIAL. (Black4)

—=—

So how does the typical public citizenship know instantly that his lands are not held by him in
allodium, as the perfection and privy of title? How does one know he is in a modern feudal state by
some other more modern name? ItÕs real simple. Only a slave pays public property taxes in service
to his lord and master. No sovereign landholder would ever pay rent or any form of tallagium to
another, for the land would be held only in private hands (under patent) in an undetermined foot-
hold without interference of time, and his heirs automatically receive that land by their own self-
evidence of blood relation in law; that is of course unless the blood of those heirs is corrupted by,
say, the rendering of publicity as the attainder of United States citizenship. A king pays no rents nor
offers any service to another. But a subject will always pay the king.

To be clear, these landholders under their own private law certainly pay taxes on what they consent
to pay to support the very government and military force that protects their status under the
constitutional provisions of the enabling acts and constitutions of the several States. For the lands
ultimately belong in their allodial status to the States (corporations) themselves, and are
subserviently patented then to individual (undivided) private citizens. The claim to the land is
through the sovereignty of State (a corporation of “People”) as a whole body, not above it. The
People is an artiÞcial person, a proper noun, and without such a legal incorporation this word
would have no higher meaning. It would be a general term instead of special. To create a ÒPeopleÓ
that word must be deÞned, and it is so deÞned as the posterity (bloodline) of the royal families and
founders. But in America, these private landholders cannot individually become tyrants over
public, United States persons resident upon their lands in municipal corporations (cities/counties),
which are of course protected under US code as foreigners. The State (People) as a corporation is
the tyrant, the “sovereign,” and all private citizens are subservient to the State.

And here we come to the ultimate Truth, one I had never expected to ÞndÉ It is irrational and
technically impossible to believe that any man or person (status) may obtain a legal standing
(status) or ßattering title in society that is higher than that corporate entity which grants such legal
personhood (status). The corporation (artiÞcial person) is a false god (sovereign), and no man may
claim to be that god, for no single man is capable of actually Being a plurality (a People). The
greatest of all patriot mythologies is that of the capacity of inherent sovereignty in any man. For
only God (Jehovah) is Truly Sovereign, and only corporations can Þctionally claim legalized
sovereignty under the law of nations. This is the death of the so-called American dream. In the end,
we see the same practice, that this false nobility of blood in America exists only under a false god
(corporation) that grants such false, ßattering titles. (See again the epilogue to this Þrst Volume for
more clarity and evidence on this subject.)

!732
It is, therefore, this separation of all common, public persons from the land (as a perfect, patented/
invented title) that causes the general population to be the slaves of the state. For without land of
his own, a man can only ever be in trespass on the private property of another, even when that land
is called as public property. Public property is property of the public, which is only property of the
landholders (the combination of private People incorporated as each State in compact) that created
the centralized federal government, which in turn created all entailed public property. In essence,
the word public is equal to water, as that which is owned by no individual (natural person). A slave
needs license to travel on public and private lands, and there is no place in the United States that is
not either public or private. A private citizen has the right and duty of easement without license
over those same public lands and highways that a public citizen needs licensure and permission to
use and cross over. In other words, what government considers as a private person (with reserved
rights) has retained the equitable (Natural Law) right of travel and must respect the negative rights
of other private men as his duty. The public person, however, is only considered as a trespasser that
is given legal right (permission in licensure) to commercially drive and use said property of the
incorporated landholders of the private States, which are controlled federally as public places
(districts/jurisdictions). This is not a Natural right of travel, only a legal privilege granted to
subjects (agents) in franchise by their principal corporation.

It is the greatest fallacy of all that citizenships of the United States actually believe in their own
ability of perfection with-out Jehovah (outside of Nature), when in fact their whole Þctional, legal
existence is designed to serve only their sovereign master (corporation) in agency. But in this
permanent state of commercial ad-venture, a public citizenshipÕs voyage is never Þnished, never
complete, never docked, until civil death. To reach perfection would be to reach the end. To Þnd
and become a part of God. To Þnd Law. This is impossible in the continued, never-ending false
pursuit of mammon in commerce. The best one can do in this private legal hell is to bear an heir (at
law) in a continued, timeless blood inheritance of family estate.

PERFECT - adjective - [Latin perfectus, perÞcio, to complete; per and facio, to do or make
through, to carry to the end.] 1. Finished; COMPLETE; consummate; NOT DEFECTIVE;
having all that is requisite to its nature and kind; as a perfect statue; a perfect likeness; a perfect
work; a perfect system. As full, as perfect in a hair as heart. 2. FULLY INFORMED; completely
skilled; as men perfect in the use of arms; perfect in discipline. 3. COMPLETE IN MORAL
EXCELLENCIES. Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect.
Matthew 5:48. 4. Manifesting perfection. My strength is made perfect in weakness. 2
Corinthians 12:9. Perfect chord, in music, a concord or union of sounds which is perfectly
coalescent and agreeable to the ear, as the Þfth and the octave; a perfect consonance. A perfect
ßower, in botany, has both stamen and pistil, or at least another and stigma. Perfect tense, in
grammar, the preterit tense; a tense which expresses AN ACT COMPLETED. - verb transitive -
[Latin perfectus, perÞcio.] To Þnish or complete so as TO LEAVE NOTHING WANTING; to
give to any thing all that is requisite TO ITS NATURE AND KIND; as, to perfect a picture or
statue. 2 Chronicles 8:16. Inquire into the nature and properties of things, and thereby perfect
our ideas of distinct species. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is
perfected in us. 1 John 4:1. 1. To instruct fully; to make fully skillful; as, to perfect one's self in
the rules of music or architecture; to perfect soldiers in discipline. (Webs1828)

—=—

Just a quick note… if perfect title in allodium is opposed to a feudal state, and only the bloodline of
heirs may possess such a grant of a piece of that allodial land via a perfected title, perhaps it’s time
to come to the realization that we all live under the similitude of feudal tenure, under the matrix
code of a sovereign kingship (incorporation) of landholders. Just saying…

In Truth, in Reality, only a man of God can resemble Perfection (Purity). For all Land and all Things
in Nature are only the Creations of God. These legal considerations and their deÞnitions are only
ever that of words on paper titles. ItÕs all Þction. And respect of them makes man imperfect and
without God’s Power of Perfection.

!733
No pretended holdings of public (US citizenships) or private persons (State citizens) can ever be in
a state of True Perfection, for only God’s Nature is of Perfection in its Origin of Design. But re-
member, legal perfection is adversarial to what is Truth, to what is the actual, substantial Perfection
of Jehovah. IT can be no other way. A status is never Self-Existent in any man, only ever being part
of a corporate system, an artiÞcial person in false godhood. As with Jehovah, only the lack of
attachments of legal, Þctional things causes land to Exist Self-Evidently in Its Perfection of Being
(without the words, names, and titles of men). God has no defects, so neither should you or your
property while held in GodÕs Name and under Its Highest Law. But when it is held in the name of
these legal gods, God is nowhere to be found by the state. This is the essence of that parabolic moral
law of the Bible, as is re-written and thus tainted in man’s legal law. Thus the Bible is foundational
to manÕs law, and no man may Þnd artiÞcial perfection in manÕs law without his recognition of and
abandonment of GodÕs Perfection of Natural Law. Again, not a religious concept, only a self-
evident Reality that says respect of legal, artiÞcial things Þctionally destroys (in law) respect and
authority of Real, Natural, Self-Existent Things. This is simple and quite obvious, really.

—=—

“Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father


who is in heaven is perfect.”
—Matthew 5:48, KJB

—=—

While in England the lands are the estate of the crown, in the United States most lands are in a
status of allodium, which means that the bloodline of People actually hold the land (as a con-
federation, a combination, a conspiracy of consanguinity in sovereign kingship), and then rent it
out in a modern feudal tenancy to the common, commercial citizenships (municeps) and to
municipal governments. While the land is held by that select group of sovereign People (States)
incorporated into a body politic (conspiracy/confederation/combination), the governments are set
up to ensure that all public persons remain illiterate (publicly educated) servants and renters only
to the private landholders, never having any connection or True interest to the land.

But the American Dream is a nightmare sold to all who would naturalize (prostitute) themselves to
the constituted authorities in voluntary servitude here based on false imagery, false representation
of what citizenship actually is. And so public-minded, voluntary slaves live their whole bonded
existence believing (loving) that the word American is akin to the spiritual words sovereign and free-
dom. They believe (love) despite all possibilities that they are one of the heirs in posterity of the
States (People), standing in pure ignorance of their own, self-imposed, unilaterally contracted fate.
Some are successful in that amoral, public commercial system of corruption based on mammon
while some arenÕt, while conscious awareness is at all turns blocked through education, enter-tain-
ment, and by the general obligations and sanctions of legal law. But none of us are perfect, for none
of us have GodÕs Nature and Law as our only sovereign. And we remain in this open-air debtorÕs
prison paying tribute to its false gods without a clue that we are merely peopled, marked cattle put
out to open range pasture (franchise).

Today, the term “tallies of loan” in the US congress has been changed to the word appropriations,
and committees are formed to appropriate (create) money and thus charge it to the national debt of
its subjected persons in citizenship. Auto and other property loans are merely a tally trade, but the
sticks are today paper, the marks made with ink. The creditor always holds Þrst lien position on the
title held by the debtor, as the principal is always seated (upon the sea) in superiority to the agent.
And of course the constitution was a very special tail, entailing lands upon their posterity (heirs by
law), but not to the peons and proles of the general public.

!734
 —=—

“Gangsterism is likely to crop up wherever the forces of law and order

are weak. European feudalism was mainly GANGSTERISM THAT
HAD BECOME SOCIETY ITSELF AND ACQUIRED
RESPECTABILITY THROUGH THE NOTIONS OF CHIVALRY.”
—Barrington Moore Jr.

—=—

The old fee simple as a feudal tenure has only changed in name (legal noun). It seems the only
difference between the modern public citizen-ship and the old Þefdom is the ignorance of the
meaning of their given pledge. The patriotic compassion that men in bondage display towards
their rulers today seems to stem only from their lack of True comprehension of the legally bound
under-standing required from their voluntary servitude, their freedom (as a permissive corporate
franchise), while remaining clueless that they hold no actual lands as dwelled tenants in rent.

FEE - noun - [Latin pecu, pecus. From the use of cattle in transferring property, or from barter
and payments in cattle, the word came to signify MONEY; it signiÞed also goods,
SUBSTANCE IN GENERAL. The word belongs to Class Bg, but the primary sense is not
obvious.] A reward or compensation for services; recompense, either gratuitous, or
established by law and claimed of right. It is applied particularly to the reward of
professional services; as the fees of lawyers and physicians; the fees of ofÞce; clerk's fees;
sheriff's fees; marriage fees, etc. Many of these are Þxed by law; but gratuities to professional
men are also called fees. - noun - [In English, is LOAN. This word, FEE INLAND, or AN
ESTATE IN TRUST, originated among the descendants of the northern conquerors of Italy,
but it originated in the south of Europe. See FEUD.] Primarily, A LOAN OF LAND, AN
ESTATE IN TRUST, GRANTED BY A PRINCE OR LORD, to be held by the grantee ON
CONDITION OF PERSONAL SERVICE, or other condition; and if the grantee or tenant
failed to perform the conditions, THE LAND REVERTED TO THE LORD OR DONOR,
called the LANDLORD, OR LEND-LORD, THE LORD OF THE LOAN. A fee then is any
land or tenement held of a superior on certain conditions. It is synonymous with FIEF and
FEUD. All the land in England, except the crown land, is of this kind. Fees are absolute or
limited. AN ABSOLUTE FEE OR FEE-SIMPLE IS LAND WHICH A MAN HOLDS TO
HIMSELF AND HIS HEIRS FOREVER, WHO ARE CALLED TENANTS IN FEE SIMPLE.
Hence in modern times, the term fee or fee simple denotes an estate of inheritance; and IN
AMERICA, WHERE LANDS ARE NOT GENERALLY HELD OF A SUPERIOR, a fee or fee
simple is an estate in which THE OWNER HAS THE WHOLE PROPERTY WITHOUT ANY
CONDITION ANNEXED TO THE TENURE. A limited fee is an estate limited or clogged
with certain conditions; as a qualiÞed or base fee which ceases with the existence of certain
conditions; and a conditional fee which is limited to particular heirs. In the United States, an
estate in fee or fee simple is what is called in English law AN ALLODIAL ESTATE, an estate
held by a person IN HIS OWN RIGHT, and descendible to the HEIRS IN GENERAL.
(Webs1828)

FEE IN ESTATES - Ordinarily, the word "fee" or "fee simple" is applied to an estate in land,
but term is applicable to any kind of hereditament, corporeal or incorporeal, and is ALL
THE PROPERTY in thing referred to or largest estate therein which person may have. A
FREEHOLD ESTATE IN LANDS, HELD OF A SUPERIOR LORD, AS A REWARD FOR
SERVICES, AND ON CONDITION OF RENDERING SOME SERVICE IN RETURN FOR
IT. The true meaning of the word "fee" is the same as that of "FEUD" or “FIEF,” and in its
original sense it is taken IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO "ALLODIUM," which latter
(allodium) is deÞned as A MAN'S OWN LAND, WHICH HE POSSESSES MERELY IN HIS

!735
 OWN RIGHT, WITHOUT OWING ANY RENT OR SERVICE TO ANY SUPERIOR. In
modern English tenures, "fee" signiÞes an estate of inheritance, being the highest and most
extensive interest which a man can have in a feud; and when the term is used simply, without
any adjunct, or in the form "fee simple," it imports AN ABSOLUTE INHERITANCE CLEAR
OF ANY CONDITION, limitation, or restriction to particular heirs, but descendible to the
heirs general, male or female, lineal or collateralÉ Base fee. A determinable or qualiÞed fee;
an estate having the nature of a fee, but not a fee simple absolute… Limited fee. An estate of
inheritance in lands, which is clogged or conÞned with some sort of condition or
qualiÞcation. Such estates are base or qualiÞed fees, conditional fees, and fees-tail. The term
is opposed to “fee simple.” …(In) American Law. An estate of inheritance WITHOUT
CONDITION, belonging to the owner, and ALIENABLE BY HIM OR TRANSMISSIBLE
TO HIS HEIRS ABSOLUTELY AND SIMPLY, and is AN ABSOLUTE ESTATE IN
PERPETUITY AND THE LARGEST POSSIBLE ESTATE A MAN CAN HAVE, BEING, IN
FACT, ALLODIAL IN ITS NATURE. EVERY ESTATE WHICH IS NOT FOR LIFE, FOR
YEARS OR AT WILL. Terms "fee," "fee simple," and "fee simple absolute" are equivalent.
(Black4)

—=—

Here again we see the time domain in legal things. That which is granted and thus lies in grant for
any period of time, be it years or for the time of the life of the person in that agency relationship, is
not in allodium. That which stands in perpetuity, as that which, without will or any other legal
thing, passes onto the heirs of the man automatically and forever (in blood consideration only) is
the perfection of title. This is the exclusion of legal interferences and limits or conditions. This is not
to be mistaken for the only True and Natural Freedom of men under God. This is only a person’s
(legal status) Þctional castle and false security.

FEE AND LIFE-RENT - In Scotch law, two estates in land Ñ the Þrst of which is the full right
of proprietorship, the second the limited right of usufruct during life - may be held together,
or may co-exist in different persons at the same time. (Black4)

ALLODARII - Owners of allodial lands. Owners of estates as large as a subject may have.
“Tenure.” (Black4)

ALLODIAL - Free; NOT HOLDEN OF ANY LORD OR SUPERIOR; OWNED WITHOUT

OBLIGATION OF VASSALAGE OR FEALTY; THE OPPOSITE OF FEUDAL. (Black4)

ALLODIUM - Land held absolutely in one's own right, and not of any lord or superior;
LAND NOT SUBJECT TO FEUDAL DUTIES OR BURDENS. An estate held by absolute
ownership, WITHOUT RECOGNIZING ANY SUPERIOR TO WHOM ANY DUTY IS DUE
ON ACCOUNT THEREOF. (Black4)

FEUD - noun - 1. Primarily, a deadly quarrel; hatred and contention that was to be terminated
only by death. Among our rude ancestors, these quarrels, though originating in the murder of
an individual, involved the whole tribe or family of the injured and of the aggressing parties.
Hence in modern usage, 2. A contention or quarrel; particularly, an inveterate quarrel
BETWEEN FAMILIES OR PARTIES IN A STATE; the discord and animosities which prevail
among the citizens of a state or city, sometimes accompanied with CIVIL WAR. In the north
of Great Britain, the word is still used in its original sense; denoting a combination of kindred
to revenge the death of any of their blood, on the offender and all his race, or any other
great enemy. We say, it is the policy of our enemies to raise and cherish intestine feuds. The
word is not strictly applicable to wars between different nations, but to intestine wars, and to
quarrels and animosities between families or small tribes. (Webs1828)

FUED - noun - [Latin Þdes; Eng. loan.] A Þef; A FEE; a right to lands or hereditaments held IN
TRUST, or on the terms of PERFORMING certain conditions; the right which a vassal or

!736
tenant has to the lands or other immovable thing OF HIS LORD, to use the same and take
the proÞts thereof hereditarily, rendering to his superior such duties and services as belong
to military tenure, etc., THE PROPERTY OF THE SOIL ALWAYS REMAINING IN THE
LORD OR SUPERIOR. From the foregoing explanation of the origin of the word, result very
naturally the deÞnition of the term, and the doctrine of FORFEITURE, UPON NON-
PERFORMANCE OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE TRUST OR LOAN. (Webs1828)

FEUDAL SYSTEM - The system of feuds. A political and social system which prevailed
throughout Europe during the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, and is supposed to
have grown out of the peculiar usages and policy of the Teutonic nations who overran the
continent after the fall of the Western Roman Empire, as developed by the exigencies of
their military domination, and possibly furthered by notions taken from the Roman
jurisprudence. It was introduced into England, in its completeness, by William I., A. D. 1085,
though it may have existed in a rudimentary form among the Saxons before the Conquest. It
formed the entire basis of the real-property law of England in medieval times; and survivals
of the system, in modern days, so modify and color that branch of jurisprudence, BOTH IN
ENGLAND AND AMERICA, THAT MANY OF ITS PRINCIPLES REQUIRE FOR THEIR
COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING A KNOWLEDGE OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. The feudal
system originated in the relations of A MILITARY CHIEFTAIN AND HIS FOLLOWERS, or
king and nobles, or lord and vassals, and especially THEIR RELATIONS AS
DETERMINED BY THE BOND ESTABLISHED BY A GRANT OF LAND FROM THE
FORMER TO THE LATTER. From this it grew into a complete and intricate complex of
rules for the tenure and transmission of real estate, and of correlated duties and services;
while, BY TYING MEN TO THE LAND AND TO THOSE HOLDING ABOVE AND
BELOW THEM, IT CREATED A CLOSE-KNIT HIERARCHY OF PERSONS, AND
DEVELOPED AN AGGREGATE OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS… (Black4)

FEUDAL TENURES - The tenures of real estate under the feudal system, such as knight-
service, socage, villenage, etc. (Black4)

FEUDAL POSSESSION - The equivalent of "SEISIN" under the feudal system. (Black4)

SEISI - In old English law. Seised; possessed. (Black4)

SEISIN - The completion of the feudal investiture, BY WHICH THE TENANT WAS
ADMITTED INTO THE FEUD, AND PERFORMED THE RIGHTS OF HOMAGE AND
FEALTY… (Black4)

FEUDALIZE - To REDUCE to a feudal tenure; TO CONFORM to feudalism. (Black4)

FEUDALISM - The feudal system; the aggregate of feudal PRINCIPLES AND USAGES. It
is a vague term to describe a congeries of customs and legal relations by no means uniform
throughout Europe and never static. But feudalism had one basic characteristic traceable
through all its variations: It rested on RELATIONS TO LAND, the primary factor in a
relatively primitive agrarian civilization. (Black4)

FEUDARY - A tenant who holds by feudal tenure, (also spelled "feudatory" and "feudatory.")
HELD BY FEUDAL SERVICE. Relating to feuds or feudal tenures. (Black4)

FEUDUM - L. Latin. A feud, Þef, or fee. A right of USING AND ENJOYING FOREVER THE
LANDS OF ANOTHER, WHICH THE LORD GRANTS ON CONDITION THAT THE
TENANT SHALL RENDER FEALTY, MILITARY DUTY, AND OTHER SERVICES. It is
NOT PROPERLY THE LAND, BUT A RIGHT IN THE LAND. This form of the word is used
by the feudal writers. The earlier English writers generally prefer the form feodum. There was
an older word feum. Its use by the Normans is exceedingly obscure. "Feudal" was not in their
vocabulary. Usually it denoted a stretch of land, rarely a tenure or mass of rights. It came to be
applied to every person who had HERITABLE RIGHTS in land. (Black4)

!737
 FEUDUM ANTIQUUM - An ancient feud or Þef; a Þef descended to the vassal FROM HIS
ANCESTORS. A Þef which ancestors had possessed for more than four generations. (Black4)

FEUDUM APERTUM - An open feud or Þef; a Þef resulting back to the lord, where THE
BLOOD OF THE PERSON LAST SEISED WAS UTTERLY EXTINCT AND GONE OR
WHERE THE TENANT COMMITTED A CRIME, or gave other legal cause. (Black4)

FEUDUM FRANCUM - A free feud. One which was noble and free from talliage and other
subsidies to which the plebeia feuda (vulgar feuds) were subject. (Black4)

FEUDUM NOVUM - A new feud or Þef; a Þef which began in the PERSON of the
feudatory, AND DID NOT COME TO HIM BY SUCCESSION. (Black4)

FEUDUM NOVUM UT ANTIQUUM - A new fee held with the qualities and incidents of an
ancient one. (Black4)

—=—

As modern ÒtenantsÓ in a limited, non-allodial type of fee system of feudalism in America, that
word usually and speciÞcally printed in mortgage contracts referencing the citizen-ship purchaser
in feud (loan/rent) as merely a tenant, we are bound by the same personal, military ÒselectiveÓ
service conditions and forfeiture laws as in those days of old, through that ancient system of
pledging service (performance contract). The banks have legally taken the middleman position and
have been assigned the authorities of the landlord (lord of the loan/feud). We even pay our
property taxes to the banks today, as a line item included in our payment of fee, with the full
violent support of the executive, administrative government in protection of its granted use to
those banks (agents) to create its (the principalÕs) money by mere signature and journal book entry,
the keeping (tally) of accounts and debtors of the exchequer (treasury).

As our dollar bill states, we put trust in the god that is government and its sovereignty. This dis-
position of every land lord (lend-lord) is all throughout the Bible as well, with the Òlord-godÓ often
being confused as being Jehovah. Kings are gods too, the land-lords, just as corporations are people
too. Anything can happen in Þction, and anything can be styled as a god.

It might be stated that the above deÞnition of feud as it describes the civil war and that revenge of
blood and race should be seriously taken into consideration here. For this is straight out of the
Talmud, the canonical and civil law book of the Jewish people, one of the sacred free-masonic lodge
books (Talmud, Bible, and Quran), by those who still abide by the strict and fallible Old Testament
Law and ways. What better revenge than to legally, artiÞcially corrupt the knowledge and blood of
an entire people, destroy and Judaize their ability to Live according to the True christian path, and
to entertain them into their own sporting oblivion?

Let us take a closer look at the True Abraham Lincoln, seeing through the historical romanticism
and into that of his True intentions as corporate CEO of the United States (union), which was to
preserve his own bloodlineÕs national ability to govern over the plebs:

—=—

ÒAmerica will never be destroyed from outside. If we falter and lose our
freedoms, IT WILL BE BECAUSE WE DESTROYED OURSELVES.”
—Abraham Lincoln

—=—

!738
 —=—

“You will take possession by military force of the printing

establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce … and
prohibit any further publication thereof…. You are therefore
commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison … the editors, proprietors
and publishers of the aforementioned newspapers.”
—Executive Order by President Lincoln, May 18, 1864

—=—

“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the

institution of slavery IN THE STATES WHERE IT EXISTS. I believe I
have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”
—President Lincoln, excerpt from his 1860 inaugural address

—=—

“My paramount object in this struggle is TO SAVE THE UNION, and is

not either to save or to destroy slavery. IF I COULD SAVE THE UNION
WITHOUT FREEING ANY SLAVE I WOULD DO IT; and if I could save
it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I
do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to
save the Union.”
—President Lincoln, excerpt from: a letter to Horace Greeley, dated August 22, 1862.

—=—

“I AM NOT, NOR EVER HAVE BEEN, IN FAVOR OF BRINGING

ABOUT IN ANY WAY THE SOCIAL AND POLITICAL EQUALITY OF
THE WHITE AND BLACK RACES. I am not, nor ever have been, in
favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to
hold ofÞce, nor to intermarry with white people. There is a physical
difference between the white and black races, which I believe WILL
FOREVER FORBID THE TWO RACES LIVING TOGETHER ON
TERMS OF SOCIAL AND POLITICAL EQUALITY.”
—President Lincoln, written in 1858, quoted from Cato Institute article ‘Lincoln, Secession and Slavery' by Tibor R. Machan

—=—

The Truth hurts. But if you are like me, you will come to love the pain… For only the Truth sets us
Free. Whatever aspect of that patriotic American dream that we have read about from a delusional,
romanticized public history (his story) published by the current posterity of victors was destroyed

!739
long ago by the civil war that Lincoln created through Executive Order (sovereign privilege). The
purpose of that war has been sold to all of us resulting, voluntary debt-slaves as purely the struggle
and effort toward the abolishment of slavery. And yet this hidden history records a completely
different Lincoln than what has been offered in that propagandist morass of public education and
fairy tales. For the result of the civil war and the ensuing reconstruction period and amendments
was not an abolishment of slavery at all, as Mr. Greeley comments so eloquently, but an inclusion of
all men acting as public citizen-ships (denizens) into the ranks of volunteerism, which is another
word for the doctrine of “master and servant.”

—=—


"Slavery discourages arts and manufacturing... EVERY master of slaves
is born a petty tyrant."
—George Mason (Virginia Delegate), 1787

—=—

“We have seen the mere distinction of color made, in the most
enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion
ever exercised by man over man."
—James Madison, 1787

—=—


"I am exceedingly distressed at the proceedings of the Convention --
being... almost sure, they will... lay the foundation of a Civil War.”
—Elbridge Gerry (Massachusetts Delegate), 1787

—=—

There is nothing romantic about the founding of a slave colony such as America. That is, unless you
decipher that word. Rome has always had slaves. So perhaps the notion of slavery is Roman-tic
after all. What do I know?

And just what is the root etymology of that Roman-tic history of the “colonies” that settled in
America?

The words colony stems from the late 14th century noun, having the meaning of an "ANCIENT
ROMAN SETTLEMENT OUTSIDE ITALY," from the Latin colonia "settled land, farm, LANDED
ESTATE," from colonus "HUSBANDMAN, TENANT FARMER, settler in new land," and from
colere "to inhabit, cultivate, frequent, practice, tend, guard, respect.” It was also used by the
Romans in their translation of the Greek apoikia, meaning "PEOPLE FROM HOME." Modern
application dates from around the 1540s.

To colonize (verb) stems from the 1620s, meaning "to settle with colonists," from the stem of the
Latin colonus "tiller of the soil, farmer;” said in the sense "TO MAKE ANOTHER PLACE INTO A
NATIONAL DEPENDENCY" without regard for settlement there by 1790s (such as in reference to
French activity in Egypt or British work in India), and probably stems directly from colony.

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, the noun form of cult stems also from the early 1600’s, meaning
"worship," and also "a particular form of worship," from the 17th century French culte, and from

!740
Latin cultus, as “care, LABOR; CULTIVATION, culture; worship, REVERENCE,” originally
"tended, cultivated," and past participle of colere “to till.” It is rare after the 17th century, though
revived in the mid-19th century as a reference to ancient or primitive rituals. The meaning of "a
devotion to a person or thing" is from 1829. A cult is an organized group of people, RELIGIOUS
OR NOT, with whom you disagree. [Rawson]

Finally, the word domicile (noun) as will be discussed in more detail stems from the mid-15th
century, from 14th century Middle French domicile, and from the Latin domicilium, perhaps from
domus "house" (see domestic) added to colere "to dwell" (see colony). As a verb, it is Þrst attested
1809. Related: Domiciled; domiciliary.

And so to have domicile is to inhabit or dwell in a place. A subject has domicile in the district of its
master, which is why US citizenships are called and treated militarily as domestics. The American
colonies had domicile in Great Britain under the king, but their residence was in the New World.

As an example of this corporate colonization and creation of plantations (colonies), one which
many historians have no difÞculty in expressing, is the notion of what a colony really is regarding
the enslavement of a people. This colonization process can be better understood by simply
revealing the nature of the East-India Company of Great Britain, the same corporation that
colonized America. The East India Company, for instance, had a monopoly upon the tea trade in
the colonies, and the Tea Act of the British Parliament forced the colonists to pay a tax (revenue) on
all unsold tea, which led to the infamous “Boston Tea Party.” This would not be dissimilar to
forcing all Americans today to purchase all unsold automobiles at the end of each Þscal year,
labeling such a purchase as a tax, and yet no taxpayer would receive the beneÞt of their tax. No
cars would be delivered. The American colonists were forced to purchase the unsold tea from
British warehouses collectively and unwillingly.

The happenings in India are described here word for word as essentially just what happened in
North America, and mirror the current political state we live under today, forced through taxation
into tribute to the district corporation of Washington DC, paying for its blunders and overstocks of
oil, stock trading, money markets, and other “bail-outs.” What was once the despised actions of a
tyrant are now the “normal” operations of this US corporation nation, and whatever complaints
were launched against the king of Great Britain by the Declaration of Independence pail in
comparison to what this district has created in its empire, not the least of which is its “standing
army” and military forces stationed around the world and in every state, protecting the interests of
the corporation in commerce and not the peopled subjects of that Romanticized colonial structure.

“The invariable course of the Company’s policy is this: EITHER THEY SET UP SOME
PRINCE TOO ODIOUS TO MAINTAIN HIMSELF WITHOUT THE NECESSITY OF
THEIR ASSISTANCE, OR THEY SOON RENDER HIM ODIOUS BY MAKING HIM THE
INSTRUMENT OF THEIR GOVERNMENT. IN THAT CASE TROOPS ARE
BOUNTIFULLY SENT TO HIM TO MAINTAIN HIS AUTHORITY. That he should have no
want of assistance, a civil gentleman, called a Resident, is kept at his court, who, under
pretense of providing duly for the pay of these troops, gets assignments on the revenue into
his hands. Under his provident management, debts soon accumulate; new assignments are
made for these debts; until, step by step, THE WHOLE REVENUE, AND WITH IT THE
WHOLE POWER OF THE COUNTRY, IS DELIVERED INTO HIS HANDS. The military do
not behold without a virtuous emulation the moderate gains of the civil department. They
feel that in a country driven to habitual rebellion by the civil government the military is
necessary; and they will not permit their services to go unrewarded. TRACTS OF
COUNTRY ARE DELIVERED OVER TO THEIR DISCRETION. Then it is found proper to
convert their commanding ofÞcers into FARMERS OF REVENUE. Thus, BETWEEN THE
WELL-PAID CIVIL AND WELL-REWARDED MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT, THE
SITUATION OF THE NATIVES MAY BE EASILY CONJECTURED. THE AUTHORITY OF
THE REGULAR AND LAWFUL GOVERNMENT IS EVERYWHERE AND IN EVERY
POINT EXTINGUISHED. Disorders and violences arise; they are repressed by other disorders

!741
 and other violences. Wherever the collectors of the revenue and the farming colonels and
majors move, ruin is about them, rebellion before and behind them. The people in crowds
ßy out of the country; AND THE FRONTIER IS GUARDED BY LINES OF TROOPS, NOT
TO EXCLUDE AN ENEMY, BUT TO PREVENT THE ESCAPE OF THE INHABITANTS.

—Edmund Burke: Speech on Mr. Fox’s East India (Company) Bill, Dec. 1, 1783

—=—


“Against misgovernment such as then afßicted Bengal it was impossible to struggle. The
superior intelligence and energy of the dominant class made their power irresistible. A war
of Bengalees against Englishmen was like a war of sheep against wolves, OF MEN AGAINST
DEMONS. The only protection which the conquered could Þnd was in the moderation, the
clemency, THE ENLARGED POLICY OF THE CONQUERORS. That protection, at a later
period, they found. But at Þrst English power came among them unaccompanied by English
morality. There was an interval between the time at which they became our subjects and the
time at which we began to reßect that we were bound to discharge towards them the duties
of rulers. DURING THAT INTERVAL THE BUSINESS OF A SERVANT OF THE
COMPANY WAS SIMPLY TO WRING OUT OF THE NATIVES A HUNDRED OR TWO
HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS AS SPEEDILY AS POSSIBLE, that he might return
home before his constitution had suffered from the heat, TO MARRY A PEER’S DAUGHTER,
to buy rotten boroughs in Cornwall, and to give balls in St. JamesÕs Square.”

—Lord Thomas Babington Macaulay: Warren Hastings, Oct. 1841    

—=—

A colony is a farm, a plantation, as Webster explains below. First the farm is peopled (stocked), and
as it was in India, the farmers of those people called as revenue collectors or ÒcheatersÓ (escheaters)
are set into positions of authority and militarily protected. The farmers of men merely changed
uniforms, from military dress to the suits and ties of Internal Revenue Collection Agents bearing
concealed weapons and the power of the legal pen.

COLONY - noun - 1. A COMPANY or BODY OF PEOPLE transplanted from their mother

country to a remote province or country to cultivate and inhabit it, AND REMAINING
SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE PARENT STATE; as the British colonies in
America or the Indies; the Spanish colonies in South America. When such settlements cease
to be subject to the parent state, they are no longer denominated colonies. The Þrst settles of
New England were the best of Englishmen, well educated, devout Christians, and zealous
lovers of liberty. There was never a colony formed of better materials. 2. The country planted
or colonized; A PLANTATION; also, the body of inhabitants in a territory colonized,
INCLUDING THE DESCENDANTS OF THE FIRST PLANTERS. The people, though born
in the territory, retain the name of colonists, till they cease to be subjects of the parent state.
3. A COLLECTION OF ANIMALS; as colonies of shell-Þsh. (Webs1828)

—=—

We were tricked into condoning our own voluntary servitude (slavery) by marrying our christian
name with the state surname. It was not a war to end slavery but to institutionalize and nationalize
it under the Romanized dictatorship of the Executive Branch. It was the rebranding of a civil,
feudatory state as the creation of a new company, the ÒUnited States.Ó This nation was, without any
doubt, created by and for slaveholders. For the constitution tells me so, and the constitution is the
bible of sovereign tyrantsÉ

CONDONE - To make condonation of. (Black4)

CONDONACION - In Spanish law. The remission of a debt, either expressly or tacitly.

(Black4)

!742
 CONDONATION - The CONDITIONAL REMISSION OR FORGIVENESS, BY MEANS
OF CONTINUANCE OR RESUMPTION OF MARITAL COHABITATION, by one of the
married parties, of a known matrimonial offense committed by the other, that would
constitute a cause of divorce; the condition being that the offense shall not be repeated.
"Condonation," to constitute valid defense in divorce action, must be free, voluntary, and not
induced by duress or fraud: "condonation" means pardon of offense, voluntary overlooking
or implied forgiveness by treating offender AS IF OFFENSE HAD NOT BEEN
COMMITTED. The term is also sometimes applied to forgiveness of a past wrong, fault,
injury, or breach of duty in other relations, as, for example, in that of MASTER AND
SERVANT. Also, antenuptial unchastity is capable of condonation. (Black4)

CONDITIONAL - That which is dependent upon or granted SUBJECT TO A CONDITION.

(Black4)

CONDITIONAL CREDITOR - In the civil law. A creditor having A FUTURE RIGHT OF

ACTION, or having a right of action IN EXPECTANCY. (Black4)

—=—

Citizenship is of course a conditional contract, a con-donation (evil gift) by a private People to let
the lowest, mean, and vulgar inhabits their lands, on the condition of good behavior and extortion
under their own updated, limited liability version of the Roman civil law.

—=—

“Any conditions are odious, but especially those which are against [in
restraint of] marriage and commerce.”
—CONDITIONES QUAELIBET ODIOSAE; MAXIME AUTEM CONTRA MATRIMONIUM ET COMMERCIUM. Lofft, Appendix, 644. (Black4)

—=—

“It is called a ‘condition’ when something is given on AN UNCERTAIN

EVENT, WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT COME INTO EXISTENCE.”
—CONDITIO DICITUR, CUM QUID IN CASUM INCERTUM QUI POTEST TENDERE AD ESSE AUT NON ESSE, CONFERTUR. CO. Litt. 201.
(Black4)


—=—

The event that is the recording of vital statistics and for which that application is then re-created
into a legal entity through the birth certiÞcate process of legal delivery is such a condition as this Ñ
the registration of an event that may or may not be executed (conÞrmed), for whether or not that
child will grow up to inhabit and ratify the commercial entity assigned to its good christian name is
unknown at the time of the “issue” of that legal persona (child, infant of unknown parentage).
Whether or not the condition will be conÞrmed when the child enters into the age of consent and
ratiÞcation in adulthood is uncertain. Thus the legal person is conditional (merely an assumed
condition) until that conÞrmation in adulthood (legalized adultery), which could be called the
express execution, consent, and maturity of that Þnancial birth instrument. This is called a wager.

To call odious the laws restricting marriage and commerce is certainly to call public citizenship as
odious, for it is these conditions and their restrictive and permissive laws that deÞne the freedom
(corporate franchise) of a legal person. Public, legal marriage is always, above all else a contract
with and under the state, and is in and of itself only an act of commerce conÞrmed by intercourse,
as all acts of incorporation are.

!743
And so we must here understand and subsequently always be aware of our own condition, be it of
blood or of a corruption of blood, of publicity or of privacy, and of personhood or of allodial (free
and reserved) right. How we conduct ourselves in public and in private creates the enduring legal
condition that we will be considered in, tacitly and expressly. And this is the importance of always
obeying God’s negative Law over that of man’s positive law, for an Act of God may never take on
the condition of legal consideration, as Being a man considered only by his actions, not his words,
names, titles, etc.

CONDUCT - verb - To manage; direct; lead; have direction; CARRY ON; regulate; DO
BUSINESS. (Black4)

CONDUCT - noun - PERSONAL BEHAVIOR; deportment; MODE OF ACTION; ANY

POSITIVE or NEGATIVE ACT. (Black4)

CONDUCTIO - In the civil law. A hiring. Used generally in connection with the term locatio,
A LETTING. Locatio et conductio, (sometimes united as a compound word, “locatio-conductio”) a
letting and hiring. (Black4)

CONDUCTOR - In the civil law. A hirer. (Black4)

CONDUCTUS - A THING hired. (Black4)

ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT - An estoppel exists where A MAN BY HIS OWN ACTS OR

ACCEPTANCE IS CONCLUDED FROM SAYING THE TRUTH. See, also, Equitable
Estoppel. The doctrine does not apply to an agreement which is illegal. Elements or
essentials of estoppel are acts done which cannot be contravened WITHOUT FRAUD OR
GROSS MISCONDUCT. Change of position to injury of party claiming beneÞt of estoppel;
FALSE REPRESENTATION OR CONCEALMENT; ignorance of facts of one claiming right
of estoppel; INDUCEMENT TO DO OR FORBEAR DOING, SOMETHING ONE WOULD
NOT, OR WOULD, OTHERWISE HAVE DONE; INTENT TO HAVE OTHER PARTY ACT
OR CONDUCT CALCULATED TO MISLEAD; knowledge of party sought to be estopped;
misleading of person claiming estoppel; prejudice to Party claiming estoppel; RELIANCE
UPON CONDUCT OF ONE SOUGHT TO BE ESTOPPED; representation or concealment
of material facts. (Black4)

—=—

Allegiance to the District of Columbia is in essence the abandonment of ligeance to God’s Nature,
the Creation (Jehovah), and therefore signiÞes an abandonment of the Natural Law. It is literally an
estoppel from telling or acting in Truth, in Reality. Allegiance is always an act of religion
(establishment of man’s relation to some legal or ecclesiastical “god” or as a falsely religious “legal”
oath in blasphemy through “God’s” name and upon the Bible). For the sovereign is the false god
whose laws one is in allegiance and fee to, and therefore one must follow that “god” over the One
True God. Again, our choice of law shows without question our actual choice of who is our lord
and master. Remember that legally granted free-dom (franchise) of religion from the state does not
include True Freedom to act morally outside the immoral or amoral laws of the legality of that
state. As all gods are proclaimed vicars (acting in replacement) of some idea of the Supreme Being,
government becomes the outlet through which man relates to God. Allegiance to government is
respect and consent that God’s creation is in-deed bound up by the secular names, legal territories
and jurisdiction (Þctional places) of man, and therefore that only certain men above that govern-
ment (as the People) pretend to be sovereign over God’s Will and Law (Nature’s Design). The
personal connection to God and ITs True Nature is broken, the state becoming a surrogate land-
lord. The state’s legal law replaces man’s conscious will and actions called his religion. It means the
state may harm and destroy all of nature (including man) with no respect to that Law of Nature.
Consideration of God (Truth) is thus estopped while man acts in the agency of personhood. If you
are a resident of government, you are not a resident of Nature. If your domicile is in Þction, the

!744
realm of Natural Law has been usurped and subsequently defeated in relation to yourself and all
those around you. But most importantly, allegiance to the state as god (the lawmaker) is allegiance
to the Þction and its lies of Þctional words, names, ßattering titles, numbers, marks, fabled
genealogies, and all other legal forms without substance, all of which is against the scriptures. The
devil cannot be defeated in its own domain.

If God is Ultimate Truth, then legal Þction is also a formally declared and sanctioned ultimatum of
“truth.” For truth can certainly be a lie if so consented to by parties ratifying it as accepted fraud in
a contract or government code, and the maxims of law allow this, the contract making the law. But
only one of these truths can Exist in Reality, for man can only have one master. Truth in Þction
(legal law) is not the same as Truth in God. In fact, it’s purposefully quite the opposite.

—=—



RELIGION:

“BOND uniting man to God, and a virtue whose purpose is to render

God worship due him AS SOURCE OF ALL BEING AND PRINCIPLE
OF ALL GOVERNMENT of THINGS.”



ÑNikulnikoff v. Archbishop, etc., of Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church, 255 N.Y.S. 653, 663, 142 Misc. 894. From deÞnition of Religion. (Black4)


—=—

This legal opinion, given as regards to one sect of the Catholic (universal) “Christian” religion, is
also talking about an ofÞce like that of Pope or King as Ògod.Ó For Jehovah has no government,
only the Design of the Self-Evident Permanence of NatureÕs Supreme Existence. And so to claim a
religious afÞliation with any corporation calling itself a religion binds man to the temporal, secular
structure of man’s legal designs against God’s very Nature of Being. The author completely
sympathizes with the reader, but offers no apologies for quoting the gods in their own
interpretations of themselves playing as gods.

Interestingly, the word “religion” breaks down as the following. Remember that the word God can
mean Spiritual or secular, True or false legal/adversarial-ness adjudged as pretended truth, and as
man acting within a corporate ofÞce of lord and god despite Jehovah:

RE - preÞx or inseparable particle - In the composition of words, denotes return, repetition,

iteration. (Webs1828)

LIG - verb intransitive - TO LIE. [See Lie.]… (Webs1828)

RELIGION - noun - relij’on - [Latin religio, from religo, TO BIND ANEW; re and ligo, TO
BIND. This word seems originally to have signiÞed AN OATH OR VOW TO THE GODS, or
the OBLIGATION of such an oath or vow, which was HELD VERY SACRED BY THE
ROMANS.] 1. Religion in its most comprehensive sense, includes a belief in the being and
perfections of God, in the revelation of his will to man, in man's obligation to obey his
commands, in a STATE of reward and punishment, and in man's accountableness to God;
and also TRUE GODLINESS OR PIETY OF LIFE, WITH THE PRACTICE OF ALL MORAL
DUTIES. It therefore comprehends theology, as A SYSTEM OF DOCTRINES OR
PRINCIPLES, as well as practical piety; for the PRACTICE OF MORAL DUTIES WITHOUT
A BELIEF IN A DIVINE LAWGIVER, AND WITHOUT REFERENCE TO HIS WILL OR
COMMANDS, IS NOT RELIGION… (Webs1828)




!745
RELIGION - …2. Religion AS DISTINCT FROM THEOLOGY, IS GODLINESS OR REAL
PIETY IN PRACTICE, consisting in the PERFORMANCE of all known DUTIES TO GOD
AND OUR FELLOW MEN, in obedience to divine command, OR FROM LOVE TO GOD
AND HIS LAW. James 1:26. 3. Religion AS DISTINCT FROM VIRTUE, OR MORALITY,
consists in the PERFORMANCE of the DUTIES WE OWE DIRECTLY TO GOD, FROM A
PRINCIPLE OF OBEDIENCE TO HIS WILL. Hence we often speak of religion and virtue,
as different branches of one system, or the duties of the Þrst and second tables of the law.
LET US WITH CAUTION INDULGE THE SUPPOSITION, THAT MORALITY CAN BE
MAINTAINED WITHOUT RELIGION. 4. ANY SYSTEM of faith and worship. In this sense,
religion comprehends the belief and worship of PAGANS AND MOHAMMEDANS, AS
WELL AS OF CHRISTIANS; any religion consisting in the belief of A SUPERIOR POWER
OR POWERS GOVERNING THE WORLD, and in the worship of such power or powers.
Thus we speak of the religion of the Turks, of the Hindoos, of the Indians, etc. AS WELL AS
OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. We speak of FALSE RELIGION as well as of TRUE
RELIGION. 5. The RITES of religion; in the plural. (Webs1828)

RELIGION - Man’s RELATION to Divinity, to reverence, worship, OBEDIENCE, AND

SUBMISSION to mandates and precepts of supernatural or superior BEINGS. In its
broadest sense includes ALL FORMS OF BELIEF IN THE EXISTENCE OF SUPERIOR
BEINGS EXERCISING POWER OVER HUMAN BEINGS by volition, IMPOSING RULES
OF CONDUCT, WITH FUTURE REWARDS AND PUNISHMENTS. One's views OF HIS
RELATIONS TO HIS CREATOR and to the obligations they impose of reverence for his
being and CHARACTER, and of obedience to his will. It is often confounded with CULTUS
or FORM of worship of a particular SECT, but is distinguishable from the latter… (Black4)

APPARITION - noun - [See Appear.] 1. In a general sense, AN APPEARANCE; visibility.

[Little used.] 2. The thing appearing; a visible object; a FORM. 3. A ghost; a specter; a visible
spirit. [This is now the usual sense of the word.] 4. MERE APPEARANCE, OPPOSED TO
REALITY. (Webs1828)

BIND - verb transitive - 1. To tie together, or conÞne with a cord, or any thing that is ßexible; to
fasten as with a band, Þllet or ligature. 2. To gird, inwrap or involve; to conÞne by a wrapper,
cover or bandage; sometimes with up; as, to bind up a wound. 3. To conÞne or restrain, as
with a chain, fetters or cord; as, bind him hand and foot. 4. TO RESTRAIN IN ANY
MANNER. He bindeth the ßoods from overßowing. Job 28:11. 5. TO OBLIGE BY A
PROMISE, VOW, STIPULATION, COVENANT, LAW, DUTY OR ANY OTHER MORAL
TIE; TO ENGAGE. IF A MAN SHALL SWEAR AN OATH TO BIND HIS SOUL WITH A
BOND. Numbers 30:2. We are bound by the laws of kindness, OF NATURE, OF A STATE,
etc. 6. TO CONFIRM OR RATIFY. WHATSOEVER THOU SHALT BIND ON EARTH,
SHALL BE BOUND IN HEAVEN. Matthew 16:19. 7. TO DISTRESS, trouble, or conÞne by
inÞrmity. Whom Satan hath bound these eighteen years. Luke 13:1. 8. To constrain by a
powerful inßuence or persuasion. I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem. Acts 20:1. 9. To
restrain the natural discharges of the bowels; to make costive; as, certain kinds of food bind the
body or bowels. 10. TO FORM A BORDER; to fasten with a band, ribbon, or any thing that
strengthens the edges; as, to bind a garment or carpet. 11. To cover with leather or anything
Þrm; to sew together and cover; as, to bind a book. 12. To cover or secure by a band; as, to
bind a wheel with tire. 13. TO OBLIGE TO SERVE, BY CONTRACT; as, to bind an
apprentice; often with out; as, to bind out a servant. 14. To make hard or Þrm; as, certain
substances bind the earth. To bind to is TO CONTRACT; as, to bind one's self to a wife. To
bind over is TO OBLIGE BY BOND TO APPEAR AT A COURT. - verb intransitive - TO
CONTRACT; to grow hard or stiff; as, clay binds by heat. 1. To grow or become costive. 2.
TO BE OBLIGATORY. - noun - …2. Among miners, indurated clay, when much mixed with
the oxyd of iron. (Webs1828)

—=—

!746
These elite pretenders believe that they are superior beings (gods), and they obviously impose their
own power and rules of conduct with a wager of future rewards and punishments in the name of
God. But they are merely liars lying in support and proclamation to their own lies, laying the
binding foundations of legal and other art forms. For a man to be bound to a corporation calling
itself a “religion” is only the same as being bound to the state itself, for every state incorporated
religion in and of itself, by its very nature as a legal creation of the state, is bound only by the laws
of the state, not of Jehovah. God’s Law is outlawed there, and the strict legal “freedom of religion”
as a franchise of non-moral action is imposed harshly and with violence. For to act upon scripture
would be to act against the legal (anti-God) state in every way. It is indeed strange to consider that
if the many denominated “Christian” religions out there standing as incorporations of the legal
“Christian” state, the scriptural Laws of christ have in no way a binding authority over them. Per-
haps that’s why they are so popular amongst the multitude of worshipers (hirelings/employees) of
mammon? And perhaps this is why the wealthy love the false church, for their very wealth is a
curse upon them in the Real world. The wealthier each individual member becomes in his
prostitution to mammon, the wealthier the corporation (church) becomes in its tithing, a farmer of
sin-tax.

Now, if you might recall, how many sermons has your corporate church minister thought regard-
ing this root of all evil? And how could he while keeping a straight face as the church collection
plates are passed around from pew to pew? This kind of institutionalized hypocrisy without
conscious thought, of going through the motions set out by law and culture, especially that of all
the multitude false doctrinal religions, is that which is most warned of in the scriptures.

—=—

“But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into
many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and
perdition. FOR THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL:
which while some coveted after, THEY HAVE ERRED FROM THE
FAITH, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. BUT
THOU, O MAN OF GOD, FLEE THESE THINGS; and follow after
righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
—1 Timothy 6: 9-11, KJB

—=—

The state allows you to believe without action, for the always forthcoming but never actualized
spiritual hope of a physical return of “Jesus Christ” by its debt-slaves is a major trickery that keeps
men under the thumb of the state. The concept here of having a visible spirit alludes to the name or
title of calling oneself by the name of a religion without actually Living by that invisible spirit and
Law invoked. I may call myself a “Christian,” just as the pagan Roman’s did under Caesar’s legal,
ßattering title, and as the districted public of the modern system of the gods of the nations united
continue in doing. But this would only be my visible, political re-presentation in name and form
only, not my actual spiritual path; not Reality. Not Truth… Hypocrites bear no shame in bearing the
name of their corporate persona in false religious title while ignoring the True, sacred, Natural Law.
Religion, or the appearance of its countenance, is naked in the eyes and suffering of Jehovah
(Nature) to its organized criminal intent.

A member of a corporate, state religion, while acting in legal persona, is a man estopped from
acting in spirituality. One cannot be a member without a legal surname, signifying the last name,
will, and testament (law).

!747
State re-lig-ion is not only to speak and respect a lie as false doctrine not of or in harmony with the
actual Scriptures and that Natural Law, but is a physical action with intent to make a promise and
oath to protect and serve that lie no differently than that oath taken to support the nation for which
that religion is incorporated under. A standing religion and government are one and the same
thing; both incapable of existing without the other. Each require a ceremony and membership to
join. It is therefore this legal “existence” of religious corporations and their legal “members” that
must be examined, as such an artiÞce is opposed to GodÕs Design and Nature. Membership is just
state citizenship reimagined for false religious purposes. Legal religions as state institutions serve
only one purpose: to govern manÕs moral actions by mental restraint so as to allow the immoral
authority of the state to rule. Corporate religion is always, in every case, a false, legally created and
conÞrmed doctrine, meaning that the morals of commercial religion are also only ever a legal
falsehood, even when they mirror the scriptures in exactness. Corporate religion is the artiÞcial
person of True christian Law; a similitude but not a sameness. Thus, while acting as citizens of
government, so too is man sustaining a false persona within his member-ship to any religion,
sailing the Holy See in ignorance of its purposeful deceit.

We live a legal lie in every way imaginable, a Þctional simulation of what is Reality. The big lie is a
corruption so deep and so true that it can barely be explained in the “dog-Latin” and legalese we
have uncovered thus far. The Òduties to GodÓ deÞned above, when conferred and conÞrmed in
manÕs persona by a corporate religion, are replaced by the taxes to government (monetary duties
required of legal law of mammon) and tithes to the church (religious taxes legally considered and
collected without state or federal taxation) — both of these being corporations (artiÞcial persons) in
their very being, and thus merely two trafÞckers in mammon under different artful titles.

Re-ligion is simply not needed if manÕs ligeance is only to the scriptural teachings, for a Bible
reading people would never allow themselves to fall prey to priests, politicians, and false judges. In
this legal world, the nature of corporate religions and governments always demand that one give
up something else in order to accept the newer doctrine, and to vow (promise) and pledge oath
(fealty) to only that single corporate body. Membership in a corporation (ecclesiastical or civil), as
part of citizenship, is a willing consent to a change of law and a state of necessary opposition to all
other Þctional nations and peoples as enemies, both foreign and domestic. It is the abandonment of all
other sovereigns (lords), including Jehovah.

—=—

“And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour;
AND LOVE NO FALSE OATH: for all these are things that I hate, saith
the LORD.”
—Zechariah 8: 17, KJB

—=—

As strange as it is to accept, calling each other as strawmen, by the legal name, is to imagine evil
(artiÞce) towards our fellow man. It is to acknowledge the legal identity over the Truth, the Source.
And thus to imagine such evil is to love the oath of allegiance to the legal state, for to acknowledge
the authority of the false legal name is to acknowledge the authority of the law of persons and its
creator gods as sovereign. There is no citizenship without oath, without allegiance to dead things
not of Jehovah.

Only the dead of spirit require the temporal comforts, vanities, imageries, and pomp of corporate
religious circumstance. Only the spiritually dead need speak by the ordained, constituted prayers
and oaths created by men in sacramental robes while chanting together publicly, for they know not
what the True Temple of the body is, and even their empty chants, hymns, and prayers are in vain.
They rely on men as godheads, masters, not on the very Nature and Permanence of Jehovah Itself.

!748
Many even pray to God in hope of receiving gifts of money or other valuable tokens in mammon
and thus in promotion of a dependence upon money, which above all else is the epitome of these
legal false doctrines and how they destroy man’s power under God.

Imagine the anthropomorphized look on God’s face if you had the nerve to ask Him for money, for
that which He hates most of all!

SECTARIAN - A term that relates and pertains to a sect or religion that differs from non-
sectarian, which is not related to a religion or sect. (Black4)

SECTARIAN - adjective - [Latin secrarius.] Pertaining to A SECT OR SECTS; AS SECTARIAN

PRINCIPLES OR PREJUDICES. - noun - One of a sect; one of a PARTY in religion WHICH
HAS SEPARATED ITSELF FROM THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH, or which HOLDS
TENETS DIFFERENT FROM THOSE OF THE PREVAILING DENOMINATION IN A
KINGDOM OR STATE. (See Secular) (Webs1828)

TEMPORAL - adjective [Latin temporalis, from tempus, TIME.] 1. Pertaining to this life or this
world or the body only; SECULAR; as temporal concerns; temporal affairs. In this sense, IT IS
OPPOSED TO SPIRITUAL. Let not temporal affairs or employments divert the mind from
spiritual concerns, which are far more important. In this sense also it is OPPOSED TO
ECCLESIASTICAL; as temporal power, that is, SECULAR, CIVIL OR POLITICAL POWER;
TEMPORAL COURTS, those which take cognizance of CIVIL suits. Temporal jurisdiction
is THAT WHICH REGARDS CIVIL AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS. 2. MEASURED OR
LIMITED BY TIME, or by this life or this state of things; HAVING LIMITED EXISTENCE;
OPPOSED TO ETERNAL. THE THINGS WHICH ARE SEEN ARE TEMPORAL BUT THE
THINGS WHICH ARE NOT SEEN ARE ETERNAL. 2 Corinthians 4:18. 3. In grammar,
relating to a tense; as a temporal augment. 4. Pertaining to the temple or temples of the head;
as the temporal bone; a temporal artery or vein; temporal muscle. (Webs1828)

—=—

Time is money… But God is timeless.

This most important concept is the basis of all temporal affairs and concerns, for everything is
valued in money, and money is merely a representation of time (i.e., future and past labor).
Mammon is measured in the potential of time, while God is Eternal and spiritual Life is timeless
(without artiÞcial values). What is time but a measure of potential, insurable value? Time (as
valued in money) is the root of any wager of money (a representation of time), a strange and
circular commerce indeed.

TIME - The measure of duration. The word is expressive both of a precise point or terminus
and of AN INTERVAL BETWEEN TWO POINTS… TIME IS THE ESSENCE OF
CONTRACT. Means that performance by one party AT TIME OR WITHIN PERIOD
SPECIFIED IN CONTRACT is essential to enable him TO REQUIRE PERFORMANCE BY
OTHER PARTY. (Black4)

—=—

This is simply manÕs attempt to control the ßow of time, which we call the currency, as the current
of the commercial sea.

Corporations in any form, including governments and religions, are always only of mammon, for a
corporation can only be created for a temporal, secular consideration, and only according to the
time allotted by its charter. No corporation or any other form of person is of the spirit of man’s
soul. All corporations are based on proÞt, either for (per) or non (not). And so while the government
(corporation) of the state may proclaim that legally corporations are people/persons too, we must re-

!749
member that governments can only declare legal, temporal things as living, not spiritual ones. Just
another lie within the lie that causes the lie to exist… for governments are also considered by other
governments as legal persons with rights of persons.

CORPORATION - AN ARTIFICIAL PERSON OR LEGAL ENTITY CREATED BY OR

UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE LAWS OF A STATE OR NATION, composed, in some
rare instances, of a single person and his successors, being the incumbents of a particular
ofÞce, but ordinarily consisting of an association of numerous individuals, WHO SUBSIST
AS A BODY POLITIC under a special DENOMINATION, which is regarded in law AS
HAVING A PERSONALITY AND EXISTENCE DISTINCT FROM THAT OF ITS SEVERAL
MEMBERS, and which is, by the same authority, vested with the capacity of continuous
succession, irrespective of changes in its membership, either in perpetuity OR FOR A
LIMITED TERM OF YEARS, and of acting as a unit or single individual in matters relating
to the common purpose of the association, WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE POWERS AND
AUTHORITIES CONFERRED UPON SUCH BODIES BY LAW. A FRANCHISE
POSSESSED BY ONE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS, who subsist as a body politic, under a
special denomination, and are vested by the policy of the law WITH THE CAPACITY OF
PERPETUAL SUCCESSION, and of acting in several respects, however numerous the
association may be, as a single individual. AN ARTIFICIAL PERSON OR BEING, endowed
by law with the capacity of perpetual succession: consisting either of a single individual,
(termed a "CORPORATION SOLE,") or of a collection of several individuals, (which is
termed a "corporation aggregate.") An intellectual body, created by law, composed of
individuals united under a common name, the members of which succeed each other, SO
THAT THE BODY CONTINUES ALWAYS THE SAME, notwithstanding the change of the
individuals who compose it, and which, for certain purposes, IS CONSIDERED A NATURAL
PERSON. A "corporation" is more nearly a method than a thing, and the law, in dealing with
a corporation, need not deÞne it as a person or entity, or even as an embodiment of functions,
rights, and duties. The statement that a "corporation" is an artiÞcial person or entity, apart from
its members, is merely a description, in Þgurative language, of a corporation viewed as a
collective body. A corporation is a collection of natural persons, joined together by their
VOLUNTARY ACTION OR BY LEGAL COMPULSION, by or under the authority of an act
of the Legislature, consisting either of a special charter or of a general permissive statute, to
accomplish some purpose, pecuniary, ideal, or governmental, authorized by the charter or
governing statute. (Black4)

ELEEMOSYNARY AND CIVIL - Lay corporations are classiÞed as "eleemosynary" and

"civil;" the former being such as are created for the distribution of alms or for the
ADMINISTRATION OF CHARITIES or for purposes falling under the description of
"charitable" in its widest sense, including hospitals, asylums, and colleges; the latter being
organized for the facilitating of business transactions and the proÞt or advantage of the
members. In the law of Louisiana, the term "civil" as applied to corporations, is used in a
different sense, being contrasted with "religious." CIVIL CORPORATIONS ARE THOSE
WHICH RELATE TO TEMPORAL POLICE; SUCH ARE THE CORPORATIONS OF THE
CITIES, THE COMPANIES FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COMMERCE AND
AGRICULTURE, literary societies, colleges or universities founded for the instruction of
youth, and the like. RELIGIOUS CORPORATIONS ARE THOSE WHOSE
ESTABLISHMENT RELATES ONLY TO RELIGION; SUCH ARE THE CONGREGATIONS
OF THE DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS PERSUASIONS. (Black4)

ELEEMOSYNARY CORPORATION - A private corporation created for charitable and

benevolent purposes. (Black4)

ELEEMOSYNARY CORPORATIONS - Such as are constituted for the perpetual

distribution of the free alms and bounty OF THE FOUNDER, in such manner as he has
directed; and in this class are ranked hospitals for the relief of poor and impotent persons, and
colleges for the promotion of learning and piety, and the support of persons engaged in

!750
 literary pursuits. THESE CORPORATIONS ARE LAY, AND NOT ECCLESIASTICAL,
EVEN THOUGH COMPOSED OF ECCLESIASTICAL PERSONS, AND ALTHOUGH
THEY IN SOME THINGS PARTAKE OF THE NATURE, PRIVILEGES, AND
RESTRICTIONS OF ECCLESIASTICAL BODIES. Eleemosynary corporations are for the
management of PRIVATE PROPERTY according to the will of the donors. They are private
lay corporations, such as colleges, hospitals, etc. They differ from civil corporations in that
the former are the MERE CREATURES OF PUBLIC INSTITUTION, created exclusively or
the public advantage, and subject to governmental control and visitation; whereas a
PRIVATE CORPORATION, especially one organized for charitable purposes, IS THE
CREATURE OF PRIVATE BENEFACTION, ENDOWED AND FOUNDED BY PRIVATE
INDIVIDUALS, AND SUBJECT TO THEIR CONTROL, LAWS, AND VISITATION, AND
NOT TO THOSE OF THE GOVERNMENT. (Black1)

ELEEMOSYNARY - Relating to the distribution of alms, bounty, or charity; charitable.

(Black1)

ELEEMOSYNARIUS - In old English law. An almoner, or CHIEF OFFICER, who received

the eleemosynary rents and gifts, and in due method distributed them to pious and charitable
uses. The name of an ofÞcer (lord almoner) of the English kings, in former times, who
distributed the royal alms or BOUNTY. (Black4)

ELEEMOSYNAE - Possessions belonging to the CHURCH. (Black4)

ELEEMOSYNARIA - The place IN A RELIGIOUS HOUSE where the common alms were
deposited, and thence by the almoner distributed to the poor. In old English law, the aumerie,
aumbry, or ambry; words still used in common speech in the north of England, to denote a
pantry or cupboard. The ofÞce of almoner. (Black4)

BOUNTY - A gratuity, or an unusual or additional beneÞt conferred upon, or compensation

paid to, A CLASS OF PERSONS. A premium given or offered TO INDUCE MEN TO
ENLIST INTO THE PUBLIC SERVICE. The term is applicable only to the payment made to
the enlisted man, as the inducement for his service, and not to a premium paid to the man
through whose intervention, and by whose procurement, the recruit is obtained and
mustered. It is not easy to discriminate between bounty, reward, and bonus. The former
(bounty) is the appropriate term, however, where the services or action of many persons are
desired, AND EACH WHO ACTS UPON THE OFFER MAY ENTITLE HIMSELF TO THE
PROMISED GRATUITY, without prejudice from or to the claims of others; while reward is
more proper in the case of a single service, which can be only once performed, and therefore
will be earned only by the person or co-operating persons who succeed while others fail. Thus,
bounties are offered to all who will enlist in the army or navy; to all who will engage in
certain Þsheries which government desire to encourage; to all who kill dangerous beasts or
noxious creatures. A reward is offered for rescuing a person from a wreck or Þre; for detecting
and arresting an offender; for Þnding a lost chattel. Bonus, as compared with bounty,
suggests the idea of a gratuity to induce a money transaction between individuals; a
percentage or gift, UPON A LOAN OR TRANSFER OF PROPERTY, OR A SURRENDER
OF A RIGHT. (Black1)

—=—

Why do loan ofÞcers and real estate agents get a bonus?

Because they are tricking the public-minded into acting publicly in an invented (patented) public
system, inducing us to use a government signature (the property of another) so as to insure that we
never claim property as our own private estate in blood inheritance, and so that we surrender any
Natural Law (negative/unalienable) rights to that property. A bonus is purely a tribute of mammon
paid to its minions (agents). The signature creates the money “from thin air.”

!751
Well, then, why are soldiers paid a bounty?

Because they are contract mercenaries; hirelings induced into public service by unscrupulous
recruiters in public schools and universities (eleemosynary corporations), which also receive a
bonus for their inducements to voluntary contract by government. They prostitute themselves to
the constituted authorities as employed hirelings in mammon, not voluntary (unpaid) militia, and
not to protect the men and women that are acting in the public, but only to ensure that peace
(commerce) between those men and women in public persona continues unabated around the
world. The public is property of government, and military force is used only to protect that interest.
But let us be clear that the corporation of the United States has only one product. As a business, it
has only its own money to protect, both in regulation of its valuation through artiÞcial scarcity and
in its controlled and regulated circulation (credit). And its military is in place for no other reason
than to protect and dominate that monetary interest in international war and commerce (peace). All
law regards some aspect of this product of money, from production to destruction. Again, all
crimes are only ever Þnancial, for all crimes stem from that root of all evil, the love (belief in the
valuation of) money.

Only when commerce is halted by political means, are those hirelings used in wars of aggression to
destroy any moral blockade of the United State’s and other leading nation’s ability to trade inter-
nationally and interstate (domestically). This is the chess game of the exchequer… protecting and
serving its created, open-air debtor’s hell on earth.

—=—

“Military men are just dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns in

foreign policy.”
—Henry Kissinger, quoted from Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein's book ‘The Final Days,’ (1976), to: Chief of Staff Alexander Haig

—=—

Remember, to be used is to be legally employed. To be dumb is to act in public person and under its
false law without a higher (regenerate) moral Law — to not speak; to remain mute by the authority
of words and ranks (ßattering titles). To be animal is to be without soul (without choice) as a pawn
(pledge); a voluntary (purchased) order-follower under foolish oath, contractual obligation, and
threat of sanction (punishment).

PEON - noun - In Hindoostan, A FOOT SOLDIER, or a footman armed with sword and
target; SAID TO BE CORRUPTED from piadah. [Qu. Latin pes, pedis.] Hence, 1. In France, A
COMMON MAN IN CHESS; usually written and called PAWN. (Webs1828)

—=—

It isn’t that Mr. Kissinger is merely an evil man for saying such things, it’s that he is telling the
abridged, pre-textual Truth. And since the Truth never offends a man (son) of God, Kissinger's fork-
tongued words should be used defensively against his ilk and certainly without patriotism
(nationalist Stockholm Syndrome).

—=—

“I was dumb with silence, I held my peace, even from good; and my
sorrow was stirred.”
—Psalms 39:2, KJB

—=—

!752
Knowing the full root of artiÞce (evil) that money represents as the purpose and identity behind
every nation and every aspect of commerce, one would think the root of all spiritual and secular
problems would be quite obvious and troubling. And yet we only seek more, allowing our bodies
to be used (employed) only for the beneÞt of mammonÕs secular, worldly means, to further build
upon the money system and prop it up with our labors (performance) in permanent debt. And we
judge all others without legal, traceable identity, without debt to the artiÞce of government,
militarily conquering all nations into this modern, united beast system. The catchphrase? We are
Òspreading freedom and democracy,Ó which means we are spreading voluntary servitude, as the
legal dis-ease of the publicity of identity, of corporate franchise (freedom) in mob rule, otherwise
known as democracy.

The word demo, from the Latin demotic, refers to a district. Democracy is best deÞned as rule by
district, where a district is further deÞned as a Òcommon people.Ó This does not mean that the
common people rule, but that the common people are ruled (districted) as a lower class, but given
the political franchise (vote/pole) to choose their rulers from the upper-class. And so, commercially
speaking, of course that royal class seeks to spread its rule (cracy) by making all common people of
all nations into public beasts of burden (demotic goy). For this will lead to legalized world peace,
which is another word for free-ßowing, utterly controlled and taxed commerce, where all common
men are marked as beasts. Some call this a New World Order, while currently the United Nations is
calling it Agenda 2030. More on this apocalyptic plan of total information awareness and domination
as we proceedÉ

Again, the King James Bible is the foundational law, an unseen, unobserved, and unenforceable
part of the common law, its current translation certainly designed to deceive the reader of only
dog-Latin unless one diligently studies its lingual origins through transliteration in the kingÕs
ÒhigherÓ language. This should at this point in our journey be self-evident. And this purposeful
transliteration problem is the case with every new Bible version published by these alternative
doctrine corporations, leaving the vulgar debate over which Bible one should read as a foolish one.
For to choose a book by its cover (name) signiÞes taking that new translation on face value without
committing to due diligence and veriÞcation of the ancient and seemingly dead but very much
alive language arts intended. The concordances and lexicons do not change. Only the English (dog-
Latin) versions change, being measurably dumbed-down with each pressing (impression) until the
Nature and meaning of Jehovah and Its Law is all but devoid from the story. Money, however,
never looses its epithet of evilÕs foundational, causal root. As technology (art) and Þction is built up
in the modern law and propaganda of society, so the scriptural purpose is twisted so as to justify
such institutionalized artiÞce under the Natural (Real) Law of God, a paradox that cannot be
remedied and that should be admonished by any reasonable seeker of what is the self-Existent
Truth (God).

And so let us look at how governments (persons) use the Bible as the foundation of volunteerism,
by employing it as their system of Òfaith.Ó Just as in the scriptures, man always has a choice.
Governments merely cloud the notion and comprehension that choice Exists, though in the end
must always concede to whatever enlightened or unenlightened choice man makes. Most men will
choose mammon, for most men have been allowed to know no other way. Public education and
media entertainment ensures this causality and course of inaction away from the path of
spirituality in and under God. And so the use of the devilÕs property (money) ensures both the law
we follow and the false god (nation/as the creator of money) we choose.

Remember, the US constitution and hundreds of other masonic constitutions in history are merely
made up of articles, which are also called as the additional amendments. Only imperfect, temporary
laws and things need amended, which is why the Eternal permanence of the Natural Law that is
Jehovah is a Design that cannot ever be in Reality amended by man. The so-called ÒBill of RightsÓ
was merely a group of twelve articles, of which 10 were ratiÞed. But never may legal articles have
authority over the spiritual, moral (unwritten) Law unless man acts in that spiritually dead
capacity of a legal, public persona (property of a corporation, not of Jehovah).

!753
ARTICLES OF RELIGION - In English ecclesiastical law. Commonly called the "Thirty-Nine
Articles;" a body of divinity DRAWN UP BY THE CONVOCATION IN 1502, AND
CONFIRMED BY JAMES I. (Black1)

ARTICLES OF FAITH - In English law. The SYSTEM of faith of the Church of England, more
commonly known as the "Thirty-Nine Articles." (Black1)

ARTICLES OF THE CLERGY - The title of a STATUTE passed in the ninth year of Edward II,
for the purpose of ADJUSTING AND SETTLING THE GREAT QUESTIONS OF
COGNIZANCE THEN EXISTING BETWEEN THE ECCLESIASTICAL AND TEMPORAL
COURTS. (Black1)

ARTICLE - noun - [Latin articulus, a joint, from artus; Gr.] 1. A single clause IN A
CONTRACT, ACCOUNT SYSTEM OF REGULATIONS, TREATY, or other WRITING; a
particular separate CHARGE or item, in an account; A TERM, CONDITION, OR
STIPULATION, IN A CONTRACT. In short, a distinct part of a writing, instrument or
discourse, consisting of two or more particulars; as, articles of agreement; an account
consisting of many articles. 2. A point of FAITH; A DOCTRINAL POINT OR
PROPOSITION IN THEOLOGY; AS THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES. 3. A distinct part.
Upon each article of HUMAN DUTY. 4. A particular COMMODITY, OR SUBSTANCE; as,
an article of merchandise; salt is a necessary article. In common usage, this word is applied to
almost every separate substance or material. The articles which compose the BLOOD. 5. A
POINT OF TIME. [Not in use.] 6. In botany, that part of a stalk or stem, which is between two
joints. 7. In grammar, AN ADJECTIVE USED BEFORE NOUNS, TO LIMIT OR DEFINE
THEIR APPLICATION; as hic, ille, ipse, in Latin; in Greek; the, this, that, in English. The
primary use of these adjectives was TO CONVERT AN INDETERMINATE NAME INTO A
DETERMINATE ONE; OR TO LIMIT THE APPLICATION OF A COMMON NAME, TO A
SPECIFIC, KNOWN, OR CERTAIN INDIVIDUAL. But article being an improper term to
express the true signiÞcation, I make use of DEFINITIVE, which see. - verb transitive - 1. TO
DRAW UP IN DISTINCT PARTICULARS; as, to article the errors or follies of a man. 2. TO
ACCUSE OR CHARGE BY AN EXHIBITION OF ARTICLES. 'He shall be articled against in
the High Court of ADMIRALTY.' Stat. 33. George III. 3. TO BIND BY ARTICLES OF
COVENANT OR STIPULATION; as, to article an apprentice to a mechanic. - verb intransitive -
[supra.] To agree by articles; to stipulate. (Webs1828)

CONSTITUTION - (repeated) - Contracts. The constitution of a contract, IS THE MAKING

OF THE CONTRACT AS, THE WRITTEN CONSTITUTION OF A DEBT. (Bouv1856)

CONSTITUTOR - (repeated) - Civil law. He who promised by a simple pact TO PAY THE
DEBT OF ANOTHER; and this is always A PRINCIPAL OBLIGATION. (Bouv1856)

DEFINITIVE - adjective - 1. Limiting the extent; DETERMINATE; POSITIVE; EXPRESS; as a

deÞnitive term. 2. Limiting; ending; determining; Þnal; OPPOSED TO CONDITIONAL,
provisional, or interlocutory; as a deÞnitive sentence or decree. - noun - In grammar, AN
ADJECTIVE USED TO DEFINE OR LIMIT THE EXTENT OF THE SIGNIFICATION OF
AN APPELLATIVE OR COMMON NOUN (NAME). Such are the Latin hic, ille, ipse; the, this
and that, in English; le, la, les, in French; il, la, lo in Italian. Thus tree is an appellative or
common noun; the tree, this tree, that tree, designate a particular tree, determinate or known.
HOMO SIGNIFIES MAN; hic homo, ille homo, A PARTICULAR MAN, etc. But in some
languages, the deÞnitives have lost their original use, in a great degree; as in the Greek and
French. Thus La force de la vertu, must be rendered in English, THE FORCE OF VIRTUE, NOT
THE FORCE OF THE VIRTUE. The Þrst la is a deÞnitive; the last has no deÞnitive effect.
(Webs1828)

—=—

!754
Clint is an ambiguous term, indeterminate, and not Þnal or Þxed in any Þctional state or publicly
registered and pre-deÞned id-entity. It is so common a name that it cannot be deÞnitively articled
to any man. The given name Clint is a gift of Life, a gift from and within Jehovah, and signiÞes
nothing but that Nature of the Life-Blood of man as a part of that Eternal Supremacy of Permanent
Being that is the Natural, Spiritual Realm of God; a Oneness with Source. But when the name Clint
is incorporated to merely describe as an adjective (article) the deÞnitive nature of the surname
(noun) Richardson (i.e., as a Þctional, Ònatural personÓ), and when other marks, numbers, and signs
are applied to that particular combination in surety, suddenly the word Clint is only a powerless
article in legal existence by virtue of the owner of the surname it describes. To address Clint in full
legal name is to make an accusation, a charge of the doom (judgement) of legal identity. This
incorporation of names is the essence of the legal trap, and the chains of the legal lie. The strawman
must be surnamed, the authority of the christian name thus destroyed by ad-diction. For the
christian name no longer represents the actions (verb) of a spiritual man, but is changed into a mere
description (adjective) of something in surety to that which is non-spiritual (anti-God). This is the
rape of manÕs True Nature.

The immediate response by a rational man to governmentÕs statement at bar that corporations are
people or persons too should be one and only one thing: to immediately rid oneself of that artiÞcial
status of legal personhood, instead of suffering at being constantly offended at having to share a
status and rights with corporations in the artiÞce. At the very least, it should make the reader
under-stand that all statuses are corporate (artiÞcial) in their nature (source), and thus artiÞcial. In
other words, if anyone or anything can be made into a person of equal status as your Self in your
own legal standing, even when that person is a piece of paper (articles of incorporation or letters
patent), then there is nothing else we can call ourselves while acting in the person of the state than
as property of the state. The proof is not those words on paper, but the very manifestation of our
choice, though it be only vicariously shown through our actions in conÞrmation of that status
(person).

The 39 articles of religion are simply the 39 forced beliefs (internal, false corporate doctrines) of the
state corporation known as the ÒChurch of England.Ó The Old Testament in the Protestant, Roman
Catholic, and Greek Orthodox Bibles just happen to also have 39 books in common, which are
Christian Biblical canon. There are only 27 books in the New Testament, and yet the Catholic Bible
somehow has a total of 73 books in its edition. You do the mathÉ

But notice that the New Testament is not included as part of the articles of faith. For the New
Testament shows man how to govern himself, that manÕs own body (Self) is the temple, and that
manÕs only salvation is through his christ-like actions in belief (love) in commitment to that Higher
Law. The church and state cannot have that as their commercial pitch in mammon, now can they?

So which Bible should we put our Trust (Faith) in?

None of them! You must read and see only self-evidently with open eyes, an open mind, and an
open heart, in search of the self-existent Truths hidden behind the purposefully mis-transliterated
nonsense that supports each speciÞcally added and proclaimed religious (eleemosynary), private
corporate doctrine. Have Faith in God (Truth), not the words of men. The King James Bible is used
herein as the Þrst choice of this author, only because it is the accepted work and moral Law at the
English common law, towards which the United States law is an independently franchised corp-
orate replica. In whatever version you may peruse, Þnd the words that express the intended self-
evident Truth of GodÕs Nature and Law and disregard what is purposefully mis-transliterated to
deceive and support the artiÞces of manÕs inventions. It is of course this very contradictory nature
of organized religions that has the side effect of turning people away from the ancient wisdom of
the actual Truths of the scriptures, as it did for myself for so long, and for which the individual
reader must study and decipher to Þnd that spiritual message within. To decipher, one must Þrst
know he holds something that has been cyphered, something that needs de-coded in the correct
intent and meaning. If whatever Bible you have supports any man acting as the temporal Pope
(antichrist), itÕs probably written that way by the supporters of that Pope. Kings will of course

!755
translate the Bible to be supportive of the kings and governments (corporations) they install. Yet
with due diligence, these unmistakable but artfully hidden Truths can be pulled from that
attempted wreckage of them. The doctrines of corporate religions are naked and without reason
when standing in comparison to the scriptures and spiritual Law they claim to be supported by, for
what is self-evident shines Light on their false nature as merely artiÞcial persons with agendas of
magistracy (godhood) that are a far cry from those scriptural teachings of christ.

False religion abounds, for any religion is false if it’s not acting and thriving within Nature’s
foundational Laws. And all established, universal “Christian” religions are of course instantly
recognizable as false by their very nature of legal existence, as corporations (artiÞcial persons) under
the state, which is against all teachings of the scriptures. A nation simply cannot be religious. A
nation is not a man. It has no soul. It makes no choice of its own.

We mustnÕt be fooled by the so-called Jewish ÒstateÓ either, for we Þnd that the law of the ÒstateÓ of
Israel is not the Bible, not the Torah, and not the Bible at all, but instead that horriÞc work of
rabbinical Þction called the BABYLONIAN Talmud. For the state is not a people, but a legal
corporation built to violently control people, a militarized zone or district not so different from the
pretended, people-less “state” of the United States as a de facto (militarized) district. No men Exist
in these Þctions of law called Israel or United States, only legal persons (statuses). Like false
Christianity, the spiritual moral law is overshadowed by false legalisms as the “civil law” doctrines
of the rabbis (priest-class) and scribes. And the inÞltration of Judaism into Christianity is as
ridiculous as mixing sheep with hungry wolves. For it is the pretended integration of the Jew
master-class and the goyim, yet another attack upon True christian understanding. This somehow
controversial view is easily veriÞed by a simple glance at the Talmud, which is the guiding force of
political and “moral” law for that people.

TALMUD - A work which embodies THE CIVIL AND CANONICAL LAW of the Jewish
people. (Black4)

—=—

Of course, just as the scriptures warn against false and forgetful hearers of the Word that use
ßattering titles of ÒChristianityÓ for political reasons only, the Bible also warns us against these
false “Jews,” whose name and title are yet another exclusionary, fabled genealogy used for status,
wealth, and gain in mammon.

—=—

“I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and
I KNOW THE BLASPHEMY OF THEM WHICH SAY THEY ARE JEWS,
AND ARE NOT, BUT ARE THE SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN.”
—Revelation 2:9, KJB

—=—

StongÕs lexicon describes this state of being in false religion, as an inÞltrating force of Òsatan,Ó so
that we may take heed of this warning per their modern day coup de tat over the Christian church.

Strong's G4567 - Satanas (Σατανᾶς)

1. ADVERSARY (one who opposes another in purpose or act), the name given to:

A. the prince of evil spirits, the inveterate adversary of God and Christ:

!756
 1. HE INCITES APOSTASY FROM GOD AND TO SIN

2. CIRCUMVENTING MEN BY HIS WILES

3. THE WORSHIPPERS OF IDOLS are said to be under his control

4. BY HIS DEMONS HE IS ABLE TO TAKE POSSESSION OF MEN AND

INFLICT THEM WITH DISEASES

5. By God's assistance he is overcome

6. On Christ's return from heaven he will be bound with chains for a thousand years,
but when the thousand years are Þnished he will walk the earth in yet greater power,
but shortly after will be given over to eternal punishment

B. A SATAN-LIKE MAN

—=—

The Israelites were known as a religious people in the Bible precisely because they were Lawful
and nationless, as a political statelessness (without false god). This is a very important lesson, for to
be a religious man is to be without legal residence and with domicile only under GodÕs Law in
Nature. Thus Jesus was accused of being the king of the Jews by the Jews, which really was a
reference to the Israelites, not all ÒJewsÓ (those opposed to christ). The Israelite, as opposed to the
generally titled Jew, was a people with clean hands and heart. The word Israelite means ÒGod
prevails,Ó which refers to GodÕs Law being followed.

—=—

“Truly God is good to Israel, even to such as are of a clean heart.”

—Psalms 73:1, KJB

—=—

“Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not
all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of
Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
That is, THEY WHICH ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE FLESH, THESE
ARE NOT THE CHILDREN OF GOD…”
—Romans 9: 6-8, KJB

—=—

And what is it that happened, what event took place that these People called as Israelites lost their
chosen status (favor) with God? What caused them to become the wretched ÒJewsÓ destined to
wander the Earth without respect and without honor among the peoples of other nations? From
what did this curse state of being and religious apostasy from GodÕs Law and Son (Word/Law)
stem from?

The Bible certainly answers this question in triplicate:

!757
 —=—

“Surely as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye

dealt treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the LORD
(Jehovah). A voice was heard upon the high places, weeping and
supplications of the children of Israel: FOR THEY HAVE PERVERTED
THEIR WAY, AND THEY HAVE FORGOTTEN THE LORD THEIR
GOD. RETURN, YE BACKSLIDING CHILDREN, AND I WILL HEAL
YOUR BACKSLIDINGS. Behold, we come unto thee; for thou art the
LORD our God. Truly in vain is salvation hoped for from the hills, and
from the multitude of mountains: truly in the LORD our God is the
salvation of Israel. FOR SHAME HATH DEVOURED THE LABOUR
OF OUR FATHERS FROM OUR YOUTH; their ßocks and their herds,
THEIR SONS AND THEIR DAUGHTERS. WE LIE DOWN IN OUR
SHAME, AND OUR CONFUSION COVERETH US: FOR WE HAVE
SINNED AGAINST THE LORD OUR GOD, WE AND OUR FATHERS,
from our youth even unto this day, AND HAVE NOT OBEYED THE
VOICE OF THE LORD OUR GOD.”
—Jeremiah 3: 20-25, KJB

—=—

We may know the false Jew (synagogue of satan/meaning the church of the adversaries of christ)
by his national afÞliation to the legalized corporation (artiÞcial person) blasphemously called as
ÒIsrael,Ó the United States standing as their protective nation of choice, just as we may know a false
“Christian” by his own birth and nativity as the goyim of the gods of the nations. This combination
of doctrines (laws) of two totally opposed to each other, adversarial (satanic) religious doctrines is
an affront to all reason and logic, and yet its popularity is growing at alarming progress as foolish
Americans are being used like pawns (peons) to Þght an ancient Jewish holy war of blood against
all of Islam, for the purposes of reestablishing what was titled as ÒGreater IsraelÓ upon the coins
and maps of older days.

Otherwise known as the ancient Òpromised landÓ from Genesis 15: 18-21 or the Complete or
ÒEntire Land of Israel,Ó which in the Hebrew was expressed as ‫ארץ ישראל השלמה‬, or Eretz Yisrael
Hashlemah, being a more accurate translation of ÒGreater Israel,Ó we Þnd it to be deÞned by three
geographical landmarks, all of which are currently held by Muslim countries. Genesis 15:18Ð21
deÞnes the land that was given to all of the children of Abraham, including Ishmael, Zimran,
Jokshan, Midian, etc., again relying on these fabled genealogies for the supposed justiÞcation of
modern war, oppression, piracy, and conquest, describes the Eretz as a large territory spanning
Òfrom the brook of Egypt to the Euphrates,Ó which includes all of modern-day Israel, the
Palestinian Territories, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab
Emeritus, Oman, Yemen, most of Turkey, and all of the land east of the Nile river. DeÞnitions are
also to be found in the books of Deuteronomy 11:24, Deuteronomy 1:7, Numbers 34:1Ð15, and
Ezekiel 47:13Ð20, though with smaller territories and of course reference to the bloodline of the
twelve tribes and their self-proclaimed, divided lands. It even describes this hostile takeover
stemming from a religious war as the lands that will be slowly, incrementally be given back to the
“the children of Israel” over many years.

!758
 —=—

“THE TALMUD IS TO THIS DAY THE CIRCULATING HEART’S

BLOOD OF THE JEWISH RELIGION. Whatever laws, customs or
ceremonies we observe — whether we are Orthodox, Conservative,
Reform or merely spasmodic sentimentalists — WE FOLLOW THE
TALMUD. IT IS OUR COMMON LAW.”
—Herman Wouk, Jewish-American author of the Caine Mutiny

—=—

“As monstrous as it may seem, we are engaged in close combat

BETWEEN ISRAEL AND THE NATIONS — and it can only be
GENOCIDAL AND TOTAL because IT IS ABOUT OUR AND THEIR
IDENTITIES.”
—Yitzhak Attia, Israel Magazine, April 2003

—=—

And we wonder where such opposition and psychological operations against the “Christian”
nations comes from? To oppose that which is being confused and used (employed) to Þght the
battles of another, is the same as opposing that which is the confuser. Zionism and patriotism are
the same thing. The military of the United States is being misdirected to support the interests of
Zionism in a self-fulÞlling prophesy that entails the conquering (in war and in purchase) and take-
over of “Greater Israel,” purposefully slaughtering millions and raping the lands of the enemies of
those satanic false Jews. And we have to realize that most so-called “Jews” are also being educated
in this system, themselves merely pawns of their own “state.” But a True Israelite of the Bible
would be of course stateless, just as any True follower of christ would be. Of course, this generally
remains out of the headlines, even when the #1 labeled terrorist in the world lets us know why we
are the very targets of they who we victimized in the Þrst place.

—=—

"Zionist plans for expansion of what is called the Great Israel... to

achieve full control over the Arab Peninsula which they intend to make
an important part of the so called Greater Israel.”
—Osama bin Laden, In a May 1998 interview with ABC's John Miller

—=—

"At Israel's founding in 1948, the Labor ZIONIST leadership, which

went on to govern Israel in its Þrst three decades of independence,
accepted a pragmatic partition of what had been BRITISH PALESTINE
into independent Jewish and Arab states. The opposition Revisionist
ZIONISTS, who evolved into today's Likud party, 


!759
 sought Eretz Yisrael Ha-Shlema—Greater Israel, or literally, the Whole
Land of Israel (shalem, meaning complete).”
—Joel Greenberg, Zionist Jewish writer for the New York Times

—=—

“Zionism” is very much like corporate “Christianity” in that neither group actually follows the
namesake or Higher Law of their religion. In other words, their common law is separate doctrine
from their religion, their civil law higher than any moral considerations of unwritten Law. And
while in America these false Jews are welcomed with open arms into a supposedly “Christian”
nation, in Israel it is often reported that, “Christian” priests and nuns are spit upon regularly and
prejudiced against greatly for their religion. For the Talmud spits upon the notion of christ in every
way, vulgarly portraying him as boiling in excrement (bile and shit) for all of eternity in hell. This
Judiazing of the law and of religion will be discussed further as we progress. For our purposes, we
need only to recognize this scripturally warned-against falsity, the corrupted simulation, legalism,
and paganism of religion and moral Law into what it has become today on every front and under
every denomination (name/noun). For there is only one Truth, one self-evident path, one God.

What is not known publicly, or what is at least severely under-reported is Osama bin Laden’s
words on this Zionist inßuence upon the totally corrupted Christian element of America. The
military attacks on the Arab people on behalf of Zionist interests have caused the same exact
discombobulation of moral right and wrong as in the Catholic history of its own murder and
conquest in the name of the incorporation of religion and spread of empire, not God’s Word. It is
the turning of the peaceful nature of True followers into the institutions of death and destruction,
where the protective necessity outweighs the necessity of peace and thwarts the ability for those
peoples to follow their Higher Law.

—=—

PBS: “Mr. bin Laden, you have issued a fatwah calling on Muslims to kill Americans where
they can, when they can. Is that directed at all Americans, just the American military, just the
Americans in Saudi Arabia?”

OSAMA BIN LADIN (as translated): “Allah has ordered us TO GLORIFY THE TRUTH and
to defend Muslim LAND, especially the Arab peninsula ... AGAINST THE UNBELIEVERS.
After World War II, THE AMERICANS GREW MORE UNFAIR AND MORE OPPRESSIVE
TOWARDS PEOPLE IN GENERAL AND MUSLIMS IN PARTICULAR. ... The Americans
started it and retaliation and punishment should be carried out FOLLOWING THE
PRINCIPLE OF RECIPROCITY, ESPECIALLY WHEN WOMEN AND CHILDREN ARE
INVOLVED. Through history, AMERICA HAS NOT BEEN KNOWN TO DIFFERENTIATE
BETWEEN THE MILITARY AND THE CIVILIANS OR BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN
OR ADULTS AND CHILDREN. Those who threw atomic bombs and used the weapons of
mass destruction against Nagasaki and Hiroshima WERE THE AMERICANS. Can the
bombs differentiate between military and women and infants and children?”

“AMERICA HAS NO RELIGION THAT CAN DETER HER FROM

EXTERMINATING WHOLE PEOPLES.”
“Your position against Muslims in Palestine is despicable and disgraceful. America has no
shame. ... WE BELIEVE THAT THE WORST THIEVES IN THE WORLD TODAY AND THE
WORST TERRORISTS ARE THE AMERICANS. NOTHING COULD STOP YOU EXCEPT
PERHAPS RETALIATION IN KIND. We do not have to differentiate between military or
civilian. As far as we are concerned, they are all targets, and this is what the fatwah says…"

!760
 “The fatwah is general and…”

“IT INCLUDES ALL THOSE WHO PARTICIPATE IN, OR HELP

THE JEWISH OCCUPIERS IN KILLING MUSLIMS.”
—Osama bin Laden interview with John Miller on PBS, 1998

—=—

Perhaps it is time to ask ourselves why we, the citizen-ships of the United States, stand so fervently
behind such a murderous coalition with such a Zionist agenda in the Middle East? Why do we
glorify and patriotically support without reason or conscious those undeclared commercial wars
and the pawns (soldiers as mercenaries for hire in mammon) used to Þght it? Perhaps the hardest
question to answer is just why we justify to ourselves the tortuous murder of so many millions of
men, woman, and children in Muslim countries and then allow ourselves to be led falsely by a
predominately Jewish, Zionist propagandist media in demonizing the True religion and culture of
those who’ve been made the involuntary victims by the weapons of that United States municipal
corporation? And why would we, with a straight face, support an oil man and the CEO of
Halliburton corporation to be president and vice president in a war for oil and for reconstruction of
what we are caused to root for to be destroyed? To call George Bush and Dick Cheney as war
criminals and proÞteers in piracy is the understatement of the century, the ÒProject For The New
American Century,” that is.

The point here is that the actions of a peaceful people under a peaceful religion, under both True
Mussulmen (the Abrahamic religion based on the Quran, a follower of Mohammed) and christ-like
tenets without artiÞce of incorporation under the state, are being misdirected and obfuscated to the
point where each of these incorporated peoples will have no choice but to participate in what is
falsely to be blamed and labeled as a “religious war,” which is forbidden in both doctrines except in
times of necessity. The maxims of law clearly state that necessity knows no law. And so we Þnd
that it is in the best self-interest of the legal lawmakers, as sovereign magistrates in legalized piracy,
to cause artiÞcial (legally declared) ÒnecessityÓ behind every move they make. This is the nature of
both Executive Branch tools labelled as Presidential Directives and Executive Orders, which are
“laws” being created solely at the will and authority of the president, with automatic approval by
statute of congress (covered in detail later in later volumes). The “war on terror” is no war at all,
merely a trick of the artists; a war against an undeÞned word-term under the doctrine (law) of
necessity where no manÕs person (Þctional character), neither foreign or domestic, is immune from
being attached with such a demeaningly ßattering title.

But behind this religious war is not the True religious man of Judah but the false Jew, the members
of the “World Zionist Organization,” manipulating and guiding the falsely proclaimed and
incorporated “Christian” goyim of the nations by pulling the strings of all adversarially (legally)
incorporated institutions of religion without mercy or any moral Law but that of their own twisted,
non-self-evident formation. And this public participation (silence as consent) can only take place
once all men are placed into a single body politic under one nation with one single voice (e pluribus
unum), where “the public” has no voice but that as one body controlled by agents of that
synagogue of satan in high places. Remember, a citizenship (Þctional, legal person) has no voice in
matters of morality as religious action, and must support in subjection the actions of its legal
creator and maker of its controlling legal law. With protection comes subjection. A slave does not
tell his master what to do or how to act. And so the people of two otherwise peaceful world
religions are played like puppets against each other, governed not by their True religious doctrines
but by a Zionist controlled Hollywood and its news media, and through inÞltration of the
“Common Core” curriculums of the public, university, and military education programs. Intention
is stolen, replaced by causality. Knowledge is reimagined into mystery. Hatred is substituted for
Love. And a permanent, murderous, unlawful, undeclared war against “terror” is pretended to be a
state of peace.

!761
 —=—

“There is nothing more frightening than active ignorance.”

—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

September 10th, 2001:

“Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces

and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.”
ÑSchool of Advanced Military Studies (SAMS) ofÞcers, reporting about the Israeli intelligence service MOSSAD, excerpted from the Washington Post, dated
September 10, 2001

—=—

ÒDeclassiÞed Þles detailing an FBI investigation targeting the American

Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC Ð the most powerful lobby in
the United States) are now available on the Internet. AIPAC was
investigated after it acquired and circulated classiÞed government
information provided in strict conÞdence by US industry and worker
groups opposed to AIPAC SPONSORED ECONOMIC LEGISLATION.”
ÑPRNewswire-USNewswire, Forbes, March 10, 2010

—=—

Many “Jews” worldwide understand the True nature of Zionism as being against the True Jewish
People’s (i.e., True Israelites’) interests. Many Jews are openly anti-Zionist, an action that would
falsely be called “antisemite” when declared by any non-Jew (Gentile). For the politically
outspoken Jew, the term “self-hating Jew” is instead used to fallaciously attack the messenger of
God’s Word. It is important to underlay here that all religious ceremony, worship, and belief are
learned actions, not inherent in any way. To Live in Truth is a choice, just as to live by false doctrine
(lies) is a choice. The problem is that we continue to chant the mantra that this type of brain-
washing and even public standard of education could never happen in our culture, in our nation,
when in fact the entire world is being subverted though organizations like the book-banning Anti-
Defamation League (ADL), being one of the largest contributors of “lesson plans” to public schools
and military colleges under “Common Core” for what it coined as “non-bias” education and
learning materials. In other words Shakespeare is being banned in public schools because the word
Jew is used disparagingly, as a supposedly anti-semite term. Much of the counterculture
propaganda in public forums and schools as to the transgender and other supposedly “biased” use
of terms of sexual identity stems from such Jewish, speciÞcally Zionist organizations as well.

Karin Friedemann for instance, as an ethnically (Hebrew speaking) Jewish anti-Zionist blogger,
wrote the following:

“American Jews are actually being trained (by Zionists) SINCE CHILDHOOD to interact
with non-Jews in a deceitful and arrogant manner, in coordination with each other, TO
EMOTIONALLY DESTROY NON-JEWS AND ISRAEL CRITICS IN ADDITION TO
WRECKING THEIR CAREERS AND INTERFERING WITH THEIR SOCIAL RELATION-
SHIPS. This is actually deliberate, wicked, planned behavior motivated by a narcissistic self-

!762
 righteous fury… The problem is that non-Jews are taught through emotional pressure and
violence VIA THE MEDIA AND THE SCHOOL SYSTEM to be very sensitive to Jewish
suffering so when a Zionist becomes outraged at them for challenging their world view, the
non-Jew really has to Þght against his own inner self in a huge battle against his Òinner JewÓ
making him feel inadequate and intimidated. But the Jew doesn’t care how much he or she
hurts others. Jews only care about what’s good for the Jews… I once reduced a 50 year old
man to hysterical sobbing tears because I told him gently and lovingly that Jews were not that
unique. I just told him the Jews, like everyone else, have had good times and bad times. Times
when they were slaughtered and other times when they slaughtered others. Just like everyone
else. Guess what he did next? He emotionally abused me in an insulting way and then cut off
all further communication. Jewish behavior is so predictable that it’s truly scary… If you
mention cutting off the money or if you mention the possible compromise of living with
Palestinians as equals in one state they become very angry and start using bullying tactics,
unless they have some reason to fear you, in which case they shun you and complain about
you to the authorities, try to get you arrested or try and DESTROY YOUR CAREER OR
SOCIAL STATUS THROUGH CHARACTER ASSASSINATION… Zionists all believe in
the MYTH of Ò1000 years of Jewish sufferingÓ AND FEEL THAT THE WORLD OWES
THEM COMPENSATION FOR THEIR ANCESTORSÕ ÒuniqueÓ suffering. It’s a criminally
insane viewpoint. They cope with the contradictions between their belief that they are the
good guys and what Jews are actually doing to their neighbors, both in the Middle East and
in the US, by developing mental health issues. Most Zionists are functional schizophrenics.Ó

—=—

Please note the difference between a religious Jew and a secular Zionist here, for one need not be in
any way a ÒJewishÓ to be a ÒZionistÓ (e.g., Sayanim, deÞned as a Zionist helper or assistant living
outside of Israel providing assistance to its government and its MOSSAD). This respecting of titles
as good or bad is exactly why the Highest Law of scripture tells us to suffer and respect not any
manÕs name or ßattering title. His actions are his own, and that goes for all men regardless of their
branding, entrainment, or breeding. Amazingly, we must not forget that all of this is based on a lie,
on a great and terrible logical fallacy. For todayÕs ÒJewÓ is much like todayÕs ÒChristian,Ó acting
Godlessly (Lawlessly) without even knowing it and yet bearing a denominational title of chosen
religion that has about as much spiritual meaning as any team and mascot of the National Football
League (NFL), which by the way is somehow also registered as a non-proÞt organization. The great
fallacy is simply that the Biblical Israel was a land (territory), not a People. It was not a nation or a
country, for these are not a part of God’s Nature, nor was it a border or city. It was nothing more
than a Law-abiding, God-fearing People. And yet all the wars and conßicts, genocides and
holocausts that have taken place throughout history are merely petty land and title disputes.
Zionism is, for all intents and purposes, the most religiously pure form of empty patriotism ever
created, of re-establishing a title of ÒlandÓ that never actually Existed in the Þrst place, one
exclusive of the so-called Jews (as opposed to the Israelites). The term Jew (Yahoody/Ioudaios) was
again used of those who fell away from Israel, Used by Paul as those speciÞcally opposed to christ
(the New Law), as those fallen away from loving GodÕs Law.

Part of this mythos of Zionism and of a goal for ÒGreater IsraelÓ is described here, again by ofÞcial
Jewish authors both in the Israeli legislature (Knesset) and in university settings, and being the as
yet unrealized dream of world-wide Zionism such as that of the Chabad, that Israel will one day
extend from the Litani River in the North (i.e., Lebanon) to the River Nile in the south (i.e., Egypt) to
the Euphrates in the West (i.e., Iraq):

—=—

DEFINING JEWISH ERETZ YISROEL (i.e., ‘Greater Israel’):

“If Zionism today means Greater Israel, not only am I a post-Zionist, I am
an anti-Zionist. If Zionism is (the illegal settlements of) Netzarim and

!763
Kiryat Arba, I am an anti-Zionist. I do not accept the type of Zionism that
took Judaism, with all its dazzling beauty, and turned it into the worship
of trees and stones. When I look around today, my feeling is that Netzarim
has become an altar, GOD HAS BECOME A MOLOCH (AN IDOL) AND
OUR CHILDREN HAVE BECOME SACRIFICES: HUMAN SACRIFICES
TO TERRIBLE IDOL WORSHIP.”
—Avrahum Burg, former Jewish Speaker of the Israeli Knesset (legislature of Israel).

—=—

“The (UN) General Assembly determines that ZIONISM IS A FORM

OF RACISM AND RACIAL DISCRIMINATION.”
—United Nations General Assembly Resolution Number 3379, which was later revoked under massive international Zionist pressure by Resolution Number 4686.

—=—

ÒWhat emerged for me, from the study of the Þrst chapters (of Sefer
Haranya, the central works of the Chabad ultra-Orthodox organization)
was the discovery that the main stream of Jewish thought is permeated
BY GENETIC SPIRITUAL SUPERIORITY OF JEWS OVER GENTILES,
disconcertingly reminiscent of racist notions of our time… Living in
Israel for the past twenty years… I have come to realize the vitality of
Jewish racist notions, and I am more than ever convinced that the hold
Judaism will have on this and future generations will be gravely
impaired unless these notions are neutralized…”
—Moshe Greenberg, Biblical scholar and Jewish author, from his book ‘A Problematic Heritage – The Attitudes Toward the Gentile in the Jewish Tradition: An
Israeli Perspective’

—=—

“We have to recognize that JEWISH BLOOD, AND THE BLOOD OF A

GOY, ARE NOT THE SAME THING.”
—Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, New York Times, June 6, 1989.

—=—

“The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews — all of

them in all different levels — IS GREATER AND DEEPER THAN THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A HUMAN SOUL AND THE SOULS OF
CATTLE.”
—Rabbi Kook, “The Elder,” from the book, “Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel”.

—=—

!764
 —=—

“If certain Jewish communities had distinctive qualities, THEY WERE

DUE TO HISTORY, NOT BIOLOGY.”

―Shlomo Sand, from ‘The Invention of the Jewish People’

—=—

“I was not raised as a Zionist, but like all other Israelis I took it for
granted that the Jews were a people living in Judea and that they were
exiled by the Romans in 70 AD.”


“But once I started looking at the evidence, I discovered that the

kingdoms of David and Solomon WERE LEGENDS.”

“Similarly with the exile. In fact, you can’t explain Jewishness without
exile. But when I started to look for history books describing the events
of this exile, I couldnÕt Þnd any. Not one.”


“THAT WAS BECAUSE THE ROMANS DID NOT EXILE PEOPLE. In

fact, Jews in Palestine WERE OVERWHELMING PEASANTS and all
the evidence suggests THEY STAYED ON THEIR LANDS.”

“It is not taught in Israeli schools but most of the early Zionist leaders,
including David Ben Gurion [IsraelÕs Þrst prime minister], believed that
the Palestinians were the descendants of the area’s original Jews. They
believed the Jews had later converted to Islam.”

“(…THE EXILE WAS A MYTH PROMOTED BY EARLY CHRISTIANS

TO RECRUIT JEWS TO THE NEW FAITH.) Christians wanted later
generations of Jews to believe that their ancestors had been exiled as a
punishment from God.”
—Quotes from article, ’Israel’s surprising best seller contradicts founding ideology,’ taken from an interview with Shlomo Sand, author of “The Invention of the
Jewish People,” as originally printed in The National, excerpted from reprint by Jonathan Cook in The Electronic Intifada (separate quotes)

—=—

“Strictly speaking IT IS INCORRECT TO CALL AN ANCIENT

ISRAELITE A ‘JEW’ OR TO CALL A CONTEMPORARY JEW AN
ISRAELITE OR A HEBREW.”
—‘A brief History of the Terms for Jew,’ 1980 Jewish Almanac, page 3

—=—

!765
 —=—

“Dominated by Zionism's particular concept of NATIONALITY, the

State of Israel still refuses, sixty years after its establishment, to see
itself as a republic that serves its citizens. ONE QUARTER OF THE
CITIZENS ARE NOT CATEGORIZED AS JEWS, AND THE LAWS OF
THE STATE IMPLY THAT ISRAEL IS NOT THEIR STATE NOR DO
THEY OWN IT. The state has also avoided integrating the local
inhabitants into the superculture it has created, and has instead
deliberately excluded them… ISRAEL INSISTS ON SEEING ITSELF
AS A JEWISH STATE BELONGING TO ALL THE JEWS IN THE
WORLD, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE NO LONGER PERSECUTED
REFUGEES BUT FULL CITIZENS OF THE COUNTRIES IN WHICH
THEY CHOOSE TO RESIDE. The excuse for this grave violation of a
basic principle of modern democracy, and for the PRESERVATION OF
AN UNBRIDLED ETHNOCRACY THAT GROSSLY DISCRIMINATES
AGAINST CERTAIN OF ITS CITIZENS, RESTS ON THE ACTIVE
MYTH OF AN ETERNAL NATION THAT MUST ULTIMATELY
FORGATHER IN ITS ANCESTRAL LAND.”
―Shlomo Sand, Jewish author and University teacher in Israel

—=—

“Behind every act in Israel's IDENTITY POLITICS stretches, like a long

black shadow, THE IDEA OF AN ETERNAL POWER AND RACE.”
―Shlomo Sand, from ‘The Invention of the Jewish People’

—=—

It’s always about the fabled genealogy, the bloodlines versus the goyim (muggles, mudbloods) of the
nations. To be ignorant of this fact is the American way, the dumbed-down public-mindedness of a
peopled colony (plantation). And yet to be external from any nation is the actual deÞnition of a
True Israelite and of a True follower of christ, to be without legal person or ethnic (national)
identity. For ethnicity is not born out of race, it is nationality. It is Þction and not to be respected in
the eyes of God.

And what is the number one cry of these oppressors? That they are racially discriminated against!
And so a state and a so-called “people” created solely on the idea of a totally exclusive race actually
has the gaul to insist that they are racially oppressed. And you wonder why God’s Word of Law
has no such limitations or requirements of genealogy, why the New Law claims all men under its
umbrella, regardless of pretended race, skin-color, or legal status? How can there be peace with
such a racist, exclusive “state” as Israel? And for that matter, how can we continue to allow the
racist bloodlines of kings to continue to rule over all “white” nations?

The beautiful answer is that all men may partake of the Þgurative Blood of christ. We may all
become christ-like. We may follow the Law of Nature, the Law of God. The only True and self-

!766
evident Law may become our self-government. None of this fabled history has a place under the
Word (Son) of Jehovah. We will not defeat these kingdoms and their bloodline rulers by bloodshed
and war, but only by doing as christ did, by picking up our stake (cross) and leaving their
jurisdictions to fall back into Nature’s God once more.

—=—

“The construction of a new body of knowledge always bears direct

connection to the IDEOLOGY in which it operates. Historical insights
that diverge from the narrative laid down at the inception of the nation
can be accepted only when consternation about their implications is
abated. This can happen WHEN THE CURRENT COLLECTIVE
IDENTITY BEGINS TO BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED AND CEASES TO
BE SOMETHING (THAT) ANXIOUSLY AND NOSTALGICALLY
CLINGS TO A MYTHICAL PAST, WHEN IDENTITY BECOMES THE
BASIS FOR LIVING AND NOT ITS PURPOSE — THAT IS WHEN
HISTORIOGRAPHIC CHANGE CAN TAKE PLACE.”
―Shlomo Sand, from ‘The Invention of the Jewish People’

—=—

In the end, the only identity one should strive to be recognized by is one of christ-like; a self-
evident, self-existent follower of the Highest moral and spiritual Law proven only by his actions
and self-responsibility thereof. In the most simplistic of terms, this merely means that one might
Exist without ego, without status, and thus without any id-entity at all. It is to act at all times as
oneÕs True Self, without lies and legal Þctions (false truths), and without ethnicity (nationality) or
corporate church (false laws). It is not only to follow Nature’s Law but to Live only to serve and Be
part of Nature (Creation and its Creator), to be a working, active, contributing part of the whole of
Jehovah instead of its adversary.

Please bear in mind that these are the words of self-proclaimed “Jews” above, not of this author,
and cannot therefore be fallaciously dismissed as racist or antisemite, a clever trick used to prevent
further discourse. This Zionist trick of words will not do here, for we seek only Truth.

—=—

Amy Goodwin (‘Democracy Now’ host):



“Often, when there is dissent expressed in the United States against the
policies of the Israeli government, people here (US) are called
“antisemitic.” What is your response to that as an Israeli Jew?”



Shulamit Aloni (former Israeli Minister, Knesset member and head of the Meretz Party):


“WELL, IT’S A TRICK. We always use it. When from Europe somebody
is criticizing Israel then we bring up ‘the holocaust.’ When in this
country (US) somebody is criticizing Israel then they are ‘antisemitic.’

!767
 And the organization is strong and has a lot of money… And their
attitude is ‘ISRAEL MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG;’ the
identiÞcation. And they are not ready to hear criticism. And it’s very
easy to blame people who criticize certain acts of the Israeli government
as anti-Semitic, and to bring up the Holocaust, and the suffering of the
Jewish people, and that is, THAT JUSTIFY EVERYTHING WE DO TO
THE PALESTINIANS.”
ÑExcerpt from live interview on ÔDemocracy Now,Õ as aired on PaciÞca Radio, August 14, 2002


—=—

“ZIONISM IS A SECULAR MOVEMENT! It’s a movement to bring the

Jewish people and give them a home in the land of Israel. IT IS NOT A
MESSIANIC MOVEMENT… those people who are extremely religious
in Israel, then theyÕll tell you that THEY ARE ANTI-ZIONIST. Because
they say “We as Jews cannot go back to Israel, unless we fulÞll whatÕs
said in the Bible, which means WAIT UNTIL THE MESSIAH COMES
AND BRINGS YOU BACK. SO IF WE GO BACK AS A RELIGIOUS
GROUP WE HAVE NO RIGHTS TO THE LAND…”

“When I was in the MOSSAD and we had a guy that gave us problems
in the US, and he was speaking out (against Israel)É So what you do is
you get in touch with a guy in the station in New York or in the station
in Washington and you say, tell the guys at Benabria (q.v.) TO LABEL
HIM. AND OF COURSE THE CAMPAIGN STARTS AND BEFORE
YOU KNOW IT THE GUY IS LABELED. AND HE’S AN
‘ANTISEMITE.’ BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT WE SAY HE IS. And that’s
one stain you cannot wash. Now, it shames me as a Jew to tell you that.
But thatÕs the fact, and it’s wrong. And the people who are perpetrating
this don’t really understand what they are doing…”
ÑEx-MOSSAD agent Victor Ostrovsky, author of ÔBy Way Of Deception: The Making Of A Mossad OfÞcer,Õ from a speech

—=—

At some point you must ask yourself, what truly is the difference between Zionism and American
patriotism? Are the Native American Indians not in similitude to the Palestinians, their lands
conquered and replaced by militarized settlements? And at what point do we say our government
is wrong, when in patriotism and in Zionism the government can do no wrong?



It is also interesting to note that the only reason Christians and Jews are “friends” is because these
false titles of people are completely secularized. They follow nothing of the Law of God. And no
religious Jew would claim Jesus christ as his Messiah or savior. Yet the secularized Christian
religions are easily assimilated and Judaized for Zionist interests, and so Israel’s only political ally,
the United States, will continue to siphon billions into Israel’s defense budget from this so-called

!768
Christian population. They even have Christians insisting, without scriptural precedent, that Jesus
christ was somehow biologically and Lawfully a Jew! (Hint: Jewishness is not biological, not
Natural.) Ironically, Jesus christ was certainly not a “Christian” either, for these are merely artful
titles of organized religion. The English word obviously didn’t even exist, and the modern word
“Jew” is not used at all in any non-English Bible. He was indeed no thing, just as his Father instruct-
ed all men of God’s Nature to be by the Law (Word). This negative Law merely means to remain
innocent as you are born to be, to avoid additions addictions of names, marks, titles, and signs of
any artfully false identities, either secular or religious. One is to Be only part of the I Am…

In the end, there is only one Truth for both of these “peoples.” They are and still are the same
damned people. Only Þction decides them, not their True Nature of Existence. We are all victims,
pawns used to create, fund, and justify feudalistic, tyrannical, de facto governments (nations). The
world-wide population that entitles itself secularly as “Jews” were used, paid off, and sometimes
militarily or politically forced out of their homes and countries in order to take refuge (as refugees)
in militarily occupied British Palestine, just as so many immigrants made their way to the shores of
the so-called New World to join in bondage with the commercial British corporations (colonies)
there. For what use would a new state of “Israel” be without a majority of lost, secular, atheistic
false “Jews” by title only, fooled into raping that land according to World Zionist Congress plans?

The World Zionist Organization (Hebrew: ‫ ;הַהִסְתְַּדּרּות הַּצִּיֹונִית הָעֹולָמִית‬HaHistadrut HaTzionit

Ha'Olamit), or WZO, was founded as the Zionist Organization (ZO; 1897–1960) at the initiative of
Theodor Herzl at the First World Zionist Congress, which took place in August 1897 in Basel,
Switzerland. Its founding goals, as the leader of the Zionist movement, were stated in its resolution
known as the “Basel Program,” which included the takeover and settlement of Palestine some 70
years before the war and land-theft actually took place. In other words, the creation of Israel and its
invented (patented) Jewish people was purely the product of commercial, political panoply. This
legal event was not in any way the ÒplanÓ or ÒdesignÓ of God, nor can it be justiÞed by any
scriptural reference without blatant and purposeful mis-transliteration. It is safe to say that all Ten
Commandments were broken during this Zionist takeover of Palestine.

In 1917, we Þnd a key to this settlement agreement and hostile takeover, as written in the Balfour
Declaration, a letter dated November 2, 1917, from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur
James Balfour to Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild, a prominent leader of the Jewish
community in Great Britain and its international kingdom, for transmission to the Zionist
Federation of Great Britain and Ireland, known also as the British Zionist Federation. Its stated
purpose was, ÒConÞrming support from the British government for the establishment in Palestine
of a "national home" for the Jewish people.” And in the end, it was the British military forces that
conquered that land on behalf of world Zionism, for organized, worldwide Jewry pledged its faith
and allegiance to the crown before world war II was staged and worldwide Jewry was shaken from
its homelands to fall helplessly into the new state (trap) of Israel, as planned long ago.



The Balfour Declaration reads:


—=—

“His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in

Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best
endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly
understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and
religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the
rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
—The Balfour Declaration, a letter dated November 2, 1917, from the United Kingdom's Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron
Rothschild

—=—

!769
To read this declaration of intent today, post military settlement and genocidal murder and harm
towards the Palestinian inhabitants and the “Transfer Agreement” of Jews forcibly out of Germany
between the Nazi (National Socialist) of Hitler and the World Jewish Congress, is a laughable
travesty of a lie.



The Jewish Shoah Resource Center explains the details of what was the actual ÒÞnal solutionÓ to
transfer Jews to Palestine:

The Transfer Agreement and the Boycott Movement: A Jewish Dilemma on the Eve of the
Holocaust

In the summer of 1933, the Jewish Agency for Palestine, the German Zionist Federation, and
the German Economics Ministry drafted a plan meant to allow German Jews emigrating to
Palestine to retain some of the value of their property in Germany by purchasing German
goods for the Yishuv, which would redeem them in Palestine local currency. This scheme,
known as the Transfer Agreement or Ha’avarah, MET THE NEEDS OF ALL INTERESTED
PARTIES: German Jews, the German economy, and the Mandatory Government and the
Yishuv in Palestine. The Transfer Agreement has been the subject of RAMIFIED
RESEARCH LITERATURE. Many Jews were critical of the Agreement from the very outset.
The negotiations BETWEEN THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT AND OFFICIAL
REPRESENTATIVES OF NAZI GERMANY evoked much wrath. In retrospect, and in view
of what we know about the annihilation of European Jewry, these relations between the
Zionist movement and Nazi Germany seem especially problematic. Even then, however, the
negotiations and the agreement they spawned were profoundly controversial in broad Jewish
circles. For this reason, UNTIL 1935 THE JEWISH AGENCY MASKED ITS ROLE IN THE
AGREEMENT AND ATTEMPTED TO PASS IT OFF AS AN ECONOMIC AGREEMENT
BETWEEN PRIVATE PARTIES…

In 1935, Gruenbaum expressed reservations about the Transfer Agreement, regarding it as

evidence of the willingness of Jewry to accept expulsion and thereby offer its consent to an
“exodus,” as he put it. But whereas Gruenbaum opposed the Transfer Agreement out of
concern that rulers in Eastern Europe, especially Poland, would consider it an exemplary way
to instigate an exodus of Jews, SOME FAVORED THE AGREEMENT FOR THESE VERY
REASONS. Margulies, manager of the “Ha’avarah Ltd.” company in Palestine on behalf of the
Anglo-Palestine Bank, was enraged by the irresolution of the Zionist movement concerning
the Transfer Agreement. In a sharply worded letter to Ruppin, the head of the German desk at
the Jewish Agency, he wrote:

ÒFor the Þrst time, the situation that Herzl predicted - the collapse of the Diaspora - has
come to pass, and for the Þrst time Zionism has an opportunity to fulÞll HerzlÕs vision
concerning THE MASS LIQUIDATION OF THIS SITUATION. It must be said that the
Zionist movement has not proved itself Þt to undertake this mission. Herzlian Zionism,
BASED ON THE THESIS THAT ALL PEOPLES ARE ANTISEMITIC, INSTRUCTED
US TO PREPARE IN ADVANCE FOR THE EXODUS, so we would be ready when the
time came. When the time came, ALL THE ZIONIST MOVEMENT DID WAS ACT
INCENSED AT THE FULFILLMENT OF ITS PREDICTIONS.”

Subsequently, in 1936, Gruenbaum himself became convinced THAT EXODUS WAS THE
ONLY SOLUTION TO THE PREDICAMENT OF POLISH JEWRY…

An accord similar to the Transfer Agreement, known as the Clearing Agreement, was worked
out between the Jewish Agency and the Polish Government in the second half of 1936 and
signed in March 1937. Its purpose was to enable Jewish emigrants from Poland to transfer
their assets to Palestine DESPITE POLISH CURRENCY LAWS BY PURCHASING POLISH
GOODS. Unlike the Transfer Agreement, the “clearing” was supposed to be reciprocal, i.e., to
create the possibility of transfers of capital and goods from Poland to Palestine and vice

!770
 versa… The Clearing Agreement began to coalesce as the condition of Polish Jewry
deteriorated and debates on “EVACUATION” became more frequent. Gruenbaum led the
negotiations on behalf of the Jewish Agency, thereby implementing his gloomy prophecy
concerning “FLIGHT AND ORGANIZED EXODUS.” These subsequent developments in
Poland thus proved the sorrowful impotence of the boycott movement in contrast to the
practicality of Zionist formula.

—Yad Vashem Studies Vol. XXVI, Jerusalem 1998, pp 129-172, translated by Naftali Greenwood

—=—

The Transfer Agreement enabled the British-backed, Freemasonic template of Albert Pike to
become a self-fulÞlling prophecy, that of the creation of a new, Þctional ÒIsraelÓ to be implemented
as a pre-curser to unrest and war in the middle east, eventually leading to World War III. Why else
would you purposefully stick a bunch of sworn enemies into the middle of surrounding Arab,
enemy countries and then protect it at huge international expense and with irrational violence from
encroachment, thereby enraging every other country thereof? The only reasonable answer to this
riddle is the recognition of the ancient goal of ÒGreater Israel,” for all these Arab countries must be
defeated for Greater Israel to extend its boundaries through them. And these Arab countries are
very aware of this foolish plan. What better way to start a war of depopulation than to forcibly
erect a threat such as this, allowing both sides to wipe each other off the map?

To quote from this much-quoted but extremely disputed source, we Þnd a masterful plan laid out
by whomever actually wrote this particular document:

—=—

“The Second World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the

differences between the Fascists and the political Zionists. THIS WAR
MUST BE BROUGHT ABOUT SO THAT NAZISM IS DESTROYED AND
THAT THE POLITICAL ZIONISM BE STRONG ENOUGH TO
INSTITUTE A SOVEREIGN STATE OF ISRAEL IN PALESTINE. During
the Second World War, International Communism must become strong
enough in order to balance Christendom, which would be then restrained
and held in check until the time when we would need it for the Þnal social
cataclysm.”

“The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the

differences caused by the 'agentur' of the 'Illuminati' BETWEEN THE
POLITICAL ZIONISTS AND THE LEADERS OF ISLAMIC WORLD. The
war must be conducted in such a way THAT ISLAM (THE MOSLEM
ARABIC WORLD) AND POLITICAL ZIONISM (THE STATE OF ISRAEL)
MUTUALLY DESTROY EACH OTHER.”
—Quoted from a disputed source: Albert Pike, from a letter to Giuseppe Mazzini, dated August 15, 1871

—=—

To be clear, these words have not been veriÞed to have been written by the quoted author, nor has
the museum veriÞed its showing in 1871. It is quoted here merely for its perfection of evil genius
and accuracy, and for the stated reason for its supposed writing, which is that these three world
wars must be instigated ignorer to bring about a One World Order (i.e., global government and

!771
religion). Because the shoe Þts so nice and snug, I include these excerpts herein. For honestly
nothing else Þts. Nothing else makes sense. And nothing else is so precisely accurate as to past and
current events and the evident reasons for them.

Of course, no one seems to ask the question, where did all the millions of so-called ÒJewsÓ come
from to Þll British occupied Palestine if they were at the same time arbitrarily exterminated in
genocide by the so-called NaziÕs? For asking such a question publicly brings the same fallacious
stylings and petty accusations, as we have discussed above. Questions about the this Zionist
inßuenced, forced economic boycott and Jewish Exodus into a new Òstate,Ó as with any religion or
religious story, are frowned upon. Were the Jews exterminatedÉ or transferred? Because
population census reports in Europe certainly show that reasonably it canÕt be both. One thing is
certainly for sureÉ

—=—

“The Hollywood Jews created a powerful cluster of IMAGES AND

IDEAS — so powerful that in a sense, THEY COLONIZED THE
AMERICAN IMAGINATION… Ultimately, AMERICAN VALUES
CAME TO BE DEFINED BY THE MOVIES THE JEWS MADE.”
ÑNeal Gabler, multi-award winning American journalist, historian, and Þlm critic, author of ÔImaginary Witness: Hollywood and the HolocaustÕ and ÔAn Empire
of Their Own: How Jews Invented Hollywood.Õ

—=—

“The truth! But it is just THE TRUTH THAT CANNOT BE KNOWN OF

THE MULTITUDE, for truth is revolutionary.”
Ñ1912 June 29, The Vote: The Organ of the WomenÕs Freedom League, Edited by Charlotte Despard, The Great Conspiracy, (Page 174, Column 2), The Minerva
Publishing Co., London.

—=—

“In a time of UNIVERSAL DECEIT, 


TELLING THE TRUTH IS A REVOLUTIONARY ACT.”
ÑUnknown origin. Though attributed to George Orwell by many authors, its Þrst appearance being a book titled ÒPartners in Ecocide: AustraliaÕs Complicity in
the Uranium CartelÓ by Venturino Giorgio Venturini (1982).

—=—

When one reads with neutrality the speeches of Adolph Hitler and considers them only by their
sameness to historically recorded facts, one gets the distinct impression that the German people,
just as those written about above in Poland, did not agree with the transference and exporting of
German (national) wealth, money, and goods along with those Jews that the German people had
been forcibly required to allow refuge and settlement therein as part of the Þrst world war treaties,
despite their known usurious, counterculture practices. Surely no ÒAmericanÓ would be happy that
his economy would be severely damaged by allowing their nations wealth to be taken by those
expatriating elsewhere to form a new, anti-Christian state. But again, we are not to ask such reason-
able or logical questions, such as, where did the population of ÒIsraelÓ and all of its imported wealth come
from if more ÒJewsÓ were killed that the census even showed to exist in Europe, lest we be labeled and
publicly condemned as something we are not! And yet the answer is clear when this knowledge of
an organized exodus (Transfer Agreement) is discovered. Of course the same sentiments were
coming from all countries where these ÒJewsÓ were attempting to take the common wealth of the
people to form a new state and allegiance elsewhere. Generally, the fact that one is not allowed to

!772
speak openly of such things without personal attack and persecution is a sure sign of its
revolutionary Truth. For the attack is never upon the message, only the messenger.



But just whom was Arthur Balfour?

—=—

“Arthur Balfour, who was a member of Hort’s Apostles, Westcott’s

Eranus, (Hort called this group a senior Apostles club), as well as
President of the S.P.R. (Society for Psychic Research), SOON BECAME
PRIME MINISTER OF ENGLAND AND INSTRUMENTAL IN THE
FIRST LEAGUE OF NATIONS. Balfour not only headed the S.P.R.,
holding seances at his home, but initiated a group called “The Synthetic
Society,” WHOSE GOAL WAS CREATE A ‘ONE WORLD RELIGION.’
He invited Fredric Myers of the S.P.R. to join and together they created
“The Preamble of all religions.” It includes the dogma, “DEPARTED
SPIRITS CAN COMMUNICATE.”
—Excerpt from the ‘historicist.com’ website

—=—

It’s a simple game plan, and one straight out of Hegel’s playbook. Create the problem, foment and
magnify the reaction, and by the false light of the newly instilled chaotic hopelessness of the lie,
offer and implement the solution. The League of Nations, being of course the ill-accepted pre-
curser to the United Nations (i.e., the Fourth Beast of Revelation), is a necessary stem in such a plan
for world governance, religion, and therefore limited education. To put it as simply as possible,
religions are doctrines (law systems), and each religion (law) opposes the other in many ways,
while all oppose the Bible (Source). A one world religion, therefore, even as we are seeing the
resulting growing pains today, can only bring a state of chaos by such conßicting laws. These lords
of chaos are then perfectly poised to offer the secular solution to such a mixed-bag of world religion
and law, which is world government through the United Nations and uniform military rule. For
only when the moral Law is broken or so profoundly distorted and confused may the law of man
take authority over such an illicit combination (conspiracy) of religious doctrines (a.k.a. One World
Religion).

But there is a much deeper aspect of this that this author cannot even begin to warn the reader
about in any reasonable terms. For what we call as science and pharmacopeia is the ancient practice
of alchemy, not only of metals but of chimeric cell lines where man is the re-creator of new Life
forms (without substance) Itself, the genetic manipulation of a Brave New World. This notion of
perfecting man, as perfecting God’s Creation, stems from the gnostic belief that man is the image of
God. And obviously this Babylonian Mystery pattern of thought has thoroughly cannibalized
corporate Christianity, as the idol worship of Jesus christ not as the Son (exempliÞed, personiÞed
Law/Word) of God but as God incarnate. And yet we cannot ever mistake “Jehovah” to be bound
by the deÞnition of man in any way. There is no man without manÕs Creator, and man is not the
Creator of that which allows him to Live within the Universe. To worship man as God is literally to
worship man as the Universe and all of the Oneness of Existence. And so we may know the root
cause of these theosophic mystery schools even as we witness Þrst hand their modern, techno-
logical (artful) and inharmonious intrusion into God’s Design of Nature and Its Law.

!773
 —=—

"Many of BIOTECHNOLOGY'S speciÞc products and areas of research

are AIMED AT CREATING NEW FORMS IN REALITY---NEW
SPECIES--- BY ASEXUAL MEANS, THAT REFLECT ESOTERIC
DOCTRINE, SUCH AS ROSICRUCIAN ALCHEMICAL PRECEPTS AS
ANDROGYNY AND MAN'S TRANSCENDENCE OF ALL MORAL
ABSOLUTES AND EVEN PHYSICAL FIXITY; perfectibility as
preached by the Cathari; and Valentinian gnosticism's teaching
regarding man's return into the 'one' via gnosis and enlightenment. All
of these are part of the same centuries' old gnostic streams. THE
ESOTERIC GOAL OF THE 'NEW WORLD ORDER' IS A CONTRA-
GENESIS ANTI-CIVILIZATION WHOSE EMBLEM IS A GNOSTIC
GARDEN OF EDEN IN WHICH MAN IS PERFECT AND
INCORRUPTIBLE. Some of the newest TECHNOLOGIES, SUCH AS
ORGAN FARMING USING TOTIPOTENT STEM CELLS OF HUMAN
EMBRYOS ARE AIMED AT IMMORTALITY, AT LEAST FOR THE
FEW.”
—Alchemist Lord Edward Bulwer-Lytton [1803-73], Martinist, Order of the Rose Croix, as quoted from Steve Van Nattan, from a correspondence from Suzanne
Rini, author of ‘Beyond Abortion: A Chronicle of Fetal Experimentation’

—=—

ÒMartinismÓ is a common name given to A SECRET MYSTIC

THEOSOPHY, CONCERNING THE ORIGIN AND DESTINY OF
MAN. The source of these teachings is shrouded in the antiquities of
history, but was concieved and shaped into a coherent philosophy and
spiritual school by three distinct individuals, giving rise to the name
ÒMartinismÓ: Martinez de Pasqually, and his two students and friends
Louis-Claude de Saint Martin and Jean-Baptiste WillermozÉ O.R.C.
teaches the martinist tradition in its three branches through initiations,
mentoring, self-studies, MEDITATION, MAGIC AND INNER
ALCHEMY. These ESOTERIC DISCIPLINES arms the initiate in his
spiritual quest, AND LEAD TO THE REVELATION OF WHAT THE
TRADITION CALLS THE ONE MYSTERY – THE INDIVIDUAL
GNOSIS OF ONE’S TRUE NATURE. Martinism is an initiatory
tradition where the ritual work uniÞes and unfolds the teachings
THROUGH ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN ITS MYSTERIES.”
ÑExcerpt from www.ordrereauxcroix.org/martinism/ Ñ ofÞcial site of the Ordre Reaux Croix

—=—

!774
We Þnd that these orders and teachings of the various Orders of theosophy have permeated all
religions and political states, not the least the United Nations, after a nineteenth century occultist
revival, the Synthetic Society being a rebrand of the Metaphysical Society.

THEOSOPHY - noun - Divine wisdom; GODLINESS. 1. KNOWLEDGE OF GOD.

(Webs1828)

THEOSOPHIST - noun - One who PRETENDS TO DIVINE ILLUMINATION; ONE WHO

PRETENDS TO DERIVE HIS KNOWLEDGE FROM DIVINE REVELATION. (Webs1828)

THEOSOPHIST - noun - [Gr. God, and comment; wise.] PRETENSION TO DIVINE

ILLUMINATION; enthusiasm. (Webs1828)

SOPHIST - noun - [Latin sophista.] 1. A professor of philosophy; as the sophists of Greece. 2. A

CAPTIOUS OR FALLACIOUS REASONER. (Webs1828)

SOPHISTRY - (repeated) - noun - 1. FALLACIOUS REASONING; REASONING SOUND IN

APPEARANCE ONLY. These men have obscured and confounded the nature of things by
their false principles and wretched sophistry. 2. EXERCISE IN LOGIC. (Webs1828)

—=—

This sophist, fallacious logic saturates the common (illiterate) practitioners of modern day Judaism,
Christianity, and Islam. One may see theosophyÕs chaotic devices at work simply by attempting to
have a rational, reasonable conversation with the typical corporate Christian of any denomination
(in name/appearance only). For instance, a common response steeped in cognitive dissonance
might be simply that you need to have faith. And yet faith means Trust, as belief in the credibility of
anything based on Truth. The doctrines of corporate religions are anything but Truth, and certainly
are not based on the scriptures, which exclaim never to take any other doctrine. There is nothing of
the self-evidence and self-Existence of God in such intercourses. Instead, the notion of blind faith in
a confounded, circular logic defeats any rational Truth or question.

And the Bible remains virtually unread, misunderstood, and theosophically defeated. The pre-
tenders becoming their own self-deceivers caught in the grand delusion exactly how it was ex-
plained within scripture. For in scripture, wisdom is not necessarily a good thing, for it is know-
ledge only of Òhuman learning; erudition; knowledge of arts and sciences.Ó However, we Þnd in
the theology of corporate religions, such human wisdom is their true religion. Wisdom, Òin
Scripture theology, wisdom is true religion; godliness; piety; the knowledge and fear of God, and
sincere and uniform obedience to his commands.Ó (Webs1828) The seemingly subtile difference here
is actually an enormous one. For human wisdom is not the same as wisdom from above. Knowledge
of what is Truth and what is Þction leads to the Wisdom of GodÕs Nature and Law. But knowledge
of humanistic concepts and inventions of manÕs secular commerce is that which is opposed to True
knowledge.

The Synthetic Society produced several papers not on its belief but on the implementation of its
beliefs into society, not the least of which is this pretended divination with ascended spirits or
masters. We Þnd again that these theosophic informations Òwere based upon communications from
the departed spirits with whom he was now convinced that he was in genuine contact.Ó A
summary of the Þve points of belief towards this model of one world religion was written by Alan
Gould:

"(1) The 'preamble of all religions,' the primary belief from which they all begin, is that
ourÉ material world is interpenetrated and to an extent acted upon, BY ANOTHER ORDER
OF THINGS, AN UNSEEN SPIRITUAL WORLDÉ IT IS ONLY IF THE EXISTENCE AND
NATURE OF SUCH A WORLD CAN BE ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFICALLY that we may
expect any rapprochement between the warring sects;

!775
 (2) 'The founders of religions have attempted to begin at once with the highest
generalizations. Starting from the existence of God… IT IS POSSIBLE THAT IN ALL THIS
MANKIND MAY HAVE BEGUN AT THE WRONG END…

(3) …WE POSSESS OR ARE EVOLVING CAPACITIES WHICH TRANSCEND MERELY

TERRENE LAWS;

(4) We can therefore obtain information about the metetherial plane BY

'COMMUNICATING' WITH THE DISCARNATE IN THE ORTHODOX WAYS…THEIR
STATE IS ONE OF ENDLESS EVOLUTION IN WISDOM AND LOVE;

(5)…the metetherial realm (is) a World Soul from contact with which we can in a suitable
frame of mind draw in a revitalising strength and Grace… And linked to all… is a Universal
Spirit… (whose) beneÞts may come DIRECTLY THROUGH THE WORLD SOUL… or are
so to speak CHANNELLED THROUGH SPIRITS NEARER TO, BUT STILL ABOVE, US.”

—Alan Gauld, The Founders of Psychical Research (pages 305-310), sourced from Tim and Barb Aho’s expose on ‘COUNCEL FOR NATIONAL POLICY,
Part Three’

—=—

It is difÞcult to differentiate between the similarities of the scriptures (GodÕs Word) and the
Luciferian doctrines of such power-hungry entities. For we are warned that the darkness will
pretend to be and appear as the Light of Truth, and that most of us will be fooled into following the
wrong path, not by reason but by our own wants and desires for which the Luciferian lawlessness
licenses and indulges. ItÕs inßuences are far and wide, extending signiÞcantly into the psychology
and psychiatry Þelds, which is of course the Þeld where human diseases are invented to secure
sales of patented drugs and as an excuse to produce ever more variations of pharmaceutical pro-
ducts (pharmakeia being transcribed in scripture as potions, poisoning, and witchcraft).

Both Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung were Members of and Contributors to the Society for Psychical
Research Journals, the SPR being credited as a source for many of JungÕs theories:

—=—

"With the founding of the Society for Psychical Research in England in

1882, and the copious publications of its investigators, new models of
THE UNCONSCIOUS MIND emerged. The most respected model was
that of the 'subliminal self' by Frederick Myers (1843-1901), the 'mytho-
poetic' (myth-making) function of which RESEMBLES JUNG'S LATER
CONCEPTION OF A COLLECTIVE UNCONSCIOUS. JUNG READ
WIDELY IN THE LITERATURE OF PSYCHICAL RESEARCH IN
MEDICAL SCHOOL AND HIS 1902 DISSERTATION CITES THE
WORK OF MYERS AND OTHERS IN THIS SCHOOL.”
—Richard Noll, The Jung Cult, Princeton University Press, 1994, (pages 31-32), sourced from Tim and Barb Aho’s expose on ‘COUNCEL FOR NATIONAL
POLICY, Part Three’

—=—

Now correct me if IÕm wrong, but the time periods of these new age transitions seem to dovetail
with that of revival Christianity, morphing it into a similarly ÒunconsciousÓ religious practice,
where one needed not to act upon oneÕs faith and Law (to follow the Son/Word) but merely to

!776
vulgarly believe it to Exist. It would certainly be accurate to the extreme to describe the organized
herds of corporate “Christians” of today, so caught up in legal society and in the clutches of
valuation and money in mammon, as those caught in purely secular ritual and ignorant of doctrine
(Law), mindlessly working without conscious thought or reason and without the spirit of True
Works, and certainly existing without any scriptural support for such unnatural and purely
legalistic behaviorism. It appears that we have moved into the realm of science without fact,
religion without consciousness, and Law without reason or spirit. And Þnally, today, we Þnd our
children and many adults attendant in schools (legal education) without True knowledge. It is self-
Evident that Jehovah certainly does not promote ignorance of Its Word. However, these occultist,
theosophic Orders of divined chaos and ultimate deceivers very much promote such idiocy to the
commonalty within their nations, preaching non-sense to their herd-masses of illiterates, knowing
quite well the revolutionary reaction caused by the dissemination of Truth. For these institutions
may only have power and authority over men that do not follow the Word of God as the
foundation of all Law. There is no antichrist without christ, no opposition without Jehovah (that
which stands in permeance as the verb of Supreme Being). There is nothing temporary without a
foundational permanence.

Make no mistake, the “nation” or “state” of Israel was not created for the True Religious Freedom
of “Jews” to Live openly under or bound to God’s Law. Israel has a purely non-religious, secular
legal matrix code just as the United States. No… like any so-called “Christian” nation, the idea of
building a nation is to stop True Religion practice (action) but not organized (tainted) belief, to
place every tribe under the law of nations. Israel is designed to enfranchise (voluntarily enslave/set
commercially free) those who take that state as their false god and dwell within its legal sanction.
The goal is to control the religion to control the people. And to do that, Even the nomadic Jews
must be placed under this word government, the United Nations. Israel is no cure for the diaspora,
but a curse and mark of the international beast system. 



And, remembering their bloodline connection in heraldry, world leaders seem to have achieved
consensus:

—=—

“The creation of AN AUTHORITATIVE WORLD ORDER is the

ultimate aim toward which we must strive.”
—Winston Churchill (United Kingdom)

—=—

“NATIONS MUST UNITE IN A WORLD GOVERNMENT OR

PERISH.”
—Charles De Gaulle (France)

—=—

“[Pope Paul VI] wrote a papal encyclical that called on the nations TO
ABANDON SOVEREIGNTY TO FORM A WORLD GOVERNMENT.”
—William T James, editor of ‘Foreshocks of Antichrist,’ 1997 (page 101)

—=—

!777
 —=—

“I agree that NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY IS THE ROOT OF ALL

EVIL.”
—Phillip Jessup, member of the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) and on the World Court, quoted by Dennis Laurence Cuddy in ‘Preisdent Clinton Will
Continue the New World Order’ (Oklahoma City, OK, Southwest Radio Church, 1993) (page 13)

—=—


“WE ARE GOING TO END UP WITH WORLD GOVERNMENT. It’s

inevitableÉ ThereÕs going to be conßict, coercion, and consensus. ThatÕs
all part of what will be required AS WE GIVE BIRTH TO THE FIRST
GLOBAL CIVILIZATION.”
—Jim Garrison, president of the Gorbachev Foundation, quoted from Dennis Laurence Cuddy’s ‘Ruling Elite: Working Towards World Government,’ The Daily
Record, (October 17, 1995), (page 4).


—=—

“We deplore the division of mankind on nationalistic grounds. We have

reached a turning point in human history where THE BEST OPTION
TO TRANSCEND THE LIMITS OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND
TO MOVE TOWARD THE BUILDING OF A WORLD
COMMUNITY…”
—Paul Kurtz, from ‘The Humanist Manifesto’ (Humanist Manifestos I and II), Prometheus Books, 1973, (page 21)

—=—

ÒWe must move as quickly as possible TO A ONE-WORLD

GOVERNMENT; A ONE-WORLD RELIGION; UNDER A ONE-
WORLD LEADER.”



—Robert Muller, former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, as quoted from Dwight L. Kinman’s ‘The Worlds Last Dictator’ 1985, (page 81)


—=—

One might mistake this as something other than a call for an institutionalized, legalized anti-
christ… And while one might read into this incorrectly and thus believe (love) this to be a good
thing, this speciÞc call for the relinquishment of the Sovereignty of all nations is actually the call to
accept the mark of the beast of this Luciferian model of a one world government and religion. It is
to accept a state sanctioned religion as well as a new legal matrix of law, were all nations are merely
states of the United Nations, and subject to its own, uniquely positioned sovereignty in the world.
This is the opposite of the teachings of christ, of self-responsibility and self-governance by God’s
Law without corporate persons posing as religions and nations. This is the beginning of the horrors
of the Book of Revelation, the rebuilding of the tower of Nations (Babel). It is to accept the new and
expanded Roman Empire, its wounds healed.

But always remember this:

!778
 —=—

“Jesus answered, MY KINGDOM IS NOT OF THIS WORLD: if my

kingdom were of this world, then would my servants Þght, THAT I
SHOULD NOT BE DELIVERED TO THE JEWS: but now is my
kingdom not from hence.
—John 18:36, KJB

—=—

Trust me when I say that christ’s kingdom would not be a member of any nation or of the United
Nations, and neither should any follower of the Law (Son). The point of being forced to Þnally
make a Real choice is close at hand. Your children are already being lead to accept all of this
through a system called as Common Core, based on Robert Muller’s “World Core Curriculum.”

—=—

“Robert Muller created a ‘WORLD CORE CURRICULUM’ and is

known throughout the world as THE ‘FATHER OF GLOBAL
EDUCATION.’”
—Excerpt from RobertMuller.org website, ‘World Core Curriculum' page

—=—

“The underlying philosophy upon which the Robert Muller School is

based upon will be found in the teachings set forth IN THE BOOKS OF
ALICE A. BAILEY (THEOSOPHY)… The school is now CERTIFIED AS
A UNITED NATIONS ASSOCIATED SCHOOL PROVIDING
EDUCATION FOR INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND
PEACE…”
—Robert Muller, former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, from the preface of his ‘World Core Curriculum’

—=—

We have seen the inßuence and implementation of this Theosophic publishing group, formally
labeled as ÒLucifer Publishing CompanyÓ and today as the ÒLucis Trust,Ó and as an ofÞcial part of
the United Nations. It is impossible for this author to stress the importance of understanding this
whole schema of world government, education, religion, and law. But one thing you had better
recognize really fast is that this doctrine of Lucifer (false light) is known as “Common Core” in
most nations, including the United States. 



Imagine that, a global, common core of education based on the cult of Alice Bailey’s writings in
Theosophy, not researched and prepared by men but instead “summoned” by “departed spirits”
that can “communicate” with the Living.

Welcome to public school…




!779
 —=—

“Lucis is a form of the Latin word, lux, and means ‘Light.’ Recent themes
include: On the threshold of a new energy era; the Spirit of
Relationship; the deep choices confronting HUMANITY; TOWARDS
AN AGE OF LIGHT… there are no fees or subscriptions charged for
study with THE ARCANE SCHOOL (“TRAINING FOR NEW AGE
DISCIPLESHIP”)… The Lucis Trust is dedicated to the establishment of
a new and better way of life FOR EVERYONE IN THE WORLD BASED
ON THE FULFILLMENT OF THE DIVINE PLAN FOR HUMANITY.
ITS EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES PROMOTE RECOGNITION AND
PRACTICE OF THE SPIRITUAL PRINCIPLES AND VALUES UPON
WHICH A STABLE AND INTERDEPENDENT WORLD SOCIETY
MAY BE BASED. The ESOTERIC PHILOSOPHY of its founder, Alice
Bailey, informs its activities which are offered freely throughout the
world in eight languages… The Lucis Trust has Consultative Status with
the Economic and Social Council OF THE UNITED NATIONS
(ECOSOC) and World Goodwill is recognized by the Department of
Public Information at the United Nations as A NON-
GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION (NGO). As such the Trust and
World Goodwill are part of a community of many hundreds of NGOs
that play an active role in the United Nations, particularly in spreading
information about the UN and fostering support for UN programs.
Since their inception Lucis Trust and World Goodwill have given their
support through MEDITATION, EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS AND
SEMINARS, BY HIGHLIGHTING THE IMPORTANCE OF THE UN'S
GOALS AND ACTIVITIES as they represent the voice of the peoples
and nations of the world.”
—Excerpt from several pages from the information awareness website for The Lucis Trust, lucistrust.org

—=—

“The underlying philosophy upon which The Robert Muller School is

based will be found in the teaching set forth IN THE BOOKS OF
ALICE A. BAILEY by the Tibetan teacher, Djwhal Khul.”
—Robert Muller, former assistant Secretary General of the United Nations and winner of the UNESCO Prize for Peace Education in 1989, in a speech for his
‘World Core Curriculum’

—=—

!780
 —=—

“[I am] a Tibetan disciple of a certain degree, and this tells you but little,
for all are disciples from the humblest aspirant UP TO AND BEYOND
THE CHRIST HIMSELF. I live in a physical body like other men on the
borders of Tibet and at times (from the exoteric standpoint) preside over a
large group of Tibetan Lamas, when my other duties permit.”
—Alice A. Bailey, from her 1934 writings describing her “master” as a psychically channeled, ascended master, known also as the “Ageless Wisdom tradition

—=—

“[The objective is] THE HELPING OF THE GREAT ONES and the
rendering to Them of that intelligent assistance WHICH WILL MAKE
THEIR PLANS FOR HUMANITY MATERIALIZE… Preparation too must
be given TO THE DEVELOPING OF HIGHER PSYCHIC POWERS…
Hospitals and SCHOOLS WILL APPEAR UNDER THE DIRECT
GUIDANCE OF THE MASTERS; TEACHERS... WILL TRAIN THE
MINDS OF THE PUPILS TO BE RESPONSIVE TO DIRECT
INSPIRATION FROM ABOVE.”


—Non-existent, but so-called “Master Djwhal Khul,” as supposedly channeled through Alice A. Bailey, from her book, ‘The Externalization of the
Hierarchy,’ (pages 516-517)

—=—

And so the now international core of common standards for both education and military training
stems from a channeled, esoteric, non-existent Tibetan teacher, whose words were apparently
channeled by the now dead Alice A. Bailey, and now fully implemented into the “New Age” as the
“Core” education system.

Do I have that correct? Because I didn’t hear any complaints about this at my last PTA meeting,
where paid civil-society actors are placed to control the ßow of topical information allowed to be
presented in order to reach a fallacious consensus based on predictive programming of popular
opinion…

If you’d like to speak directly, or indirectly, to this ascended master Djwhal Khul, just as Alice A.
Bailey did a century ago through her own channeling, I’ve got some great news for you! Let’s read
from the Master DK website:

—=—

Personal Sessions:

“In ancient spiritual traditions, the power of the DIRECT ENERGETIC

TRANSMISSION FROM TEACHER TO STUDENT was recognized as
the single most transformative experience available to an aspirant. For
many today, A PRIVATE SESSION WITH MASTER DK PROVES TO

!781
 BE EXQUISITELY PROFOUND AND OFTEN LIFE ALTERING.
Sessions are offered via telephone, and run approximately 50 minutes…
A single session costs $175. For those calling internationally, “What’s
App” is available to allow free phone time. An mp3 recording of the
session will be sent to you via e-mail.”
—From masterdk.com website, personal sessions section

—=—

Psychic Friends Network be damned! Why hear it from a third person, hireling phone-bank
psychic in a strip-mall cubicle when you can hear it straight from the channeled demon— er, I
mean, ascended (dead) master’s otherworldly presence over the telephone? Apparently this is the
same as a direct connection, an “energetic transmission.” I wonder if they take Master-Card? That
would be clever marketing, would it not? They should sponsor the DK-MasterCard — the worlds
Þrst natural, life-altering credit card. I guess now we know where the Council of Nations will be
getting its spiritual advice from. Hopefully they get a minion discount for insiders.

In actuality, we Þnd the following:

—=—

“MasterDK.com is dedicated to helping people FIND INNER PEACE IN

A CHAOTIC WORLD. As we negotiate the precarious territory of the
21st century, the wisdom of a Master Teacher can provide invaluable
help and inspiration. KATHLYN KINGDON has been sharing the
timeless wisdom of “The Tibetan” with the world since 1983.”

Master Djwhal Khul:


“A Master Teacher in every respect, Djwhal Khul is recognized as one of

the Great Masters of Wisdom and Compassion. Dedicated to helping all
beings achieve inner peace, he teaches that enlightenment will be
experienced AS A GROUP PROCESS IN THIS NEW AGE. Drawing on
the collective wisdom of many spiritual traditions, Master DK is a
captivating storyteller who powerfully illuminates important spiritual
truths. His students come away with a profound appreciation for HIS
vastness, depth, and clarity.”

What is an Ascended Master?


“Ascended Masters are traditionally held to have been spiritual adepts

formerly EMBODIED ON EARTH who, through rigorous spiritual
transformation and metamorphosis OVER LIFETIMES, GAINED

!782
 MASTERY OVER THE MATERIAL REALM. This achievement is
generally considered to be THE COMPLETE AND PERMANENT ACT
OF UNION WITH THE DIVINE. Having attained the spiritual wisdom
and physical mastery required, an Ascended Master has no further need
of a physical body AND CONTINUES TO EVOLVE AS A COSMIC
BEING.”
—From masterdk.com website, about section

—=—

“My kingdom is not of this world.” —Jesus christ

Translation: my realm is certainly not the material realm. A mastery of the material realm is not even
worth placing upon a resume to Jehovah.

—=—

“There is no political solution

To our troubled evolution
Have no faith in constitution
There is no bloody revolution
We are spirits in the material world…
Our so-called leaders speak
With words they try to jail you
They subjugate the meek
But it's the rhetoric of failure

We are spirits in the material world”
—‘The Police,’ lyrics from the song ‘Spirits In The Material World’

—=—

This strange, New Age push for a cosmic Jesus permeates many religions, including Mormonism,
where each initiate may ascend to acquire and rule over their own planet to be the “Jesus” as god
Þgure over it. But I assure you, when Jesus christ state that's kingdom is not of this world, he is not
referring to another planet, not even planet Kolab.

—=—

“If you could hie to Kolob In the twinkling of an eye,

And then continue onward With that same speed to ßy,
Do you think that you could ever, Through all eternity,
Find out the generation WHERE GODS BEGAN TO BE?”
—Mormon hymm, ‘If You Could Hie to Kolob,’ written by William W. Phelps, 1792-1872

—=—

!783
 —=—

“Kolob, signifying the Þrst creation, nearest to the celestial, or the

residence of God. First in government, the last pertaining to THE
MEASUREMENT OF TIME. The measurement according to celestial
time, which celestial time signiÞes one day to a cubit. One day in Kolob
is equal to a thousand years according to the measurement of the Earth,
WHICH IS CALLED BY THE EGYPTIANS JAH-OH-EH.”
—Egyptian hypocephalus, from hieroglyphics interpreted by Joseph Smith, President (corporation sole), founder and diviner of the Mormon corporation (church)
that was part of the ‘Joseph Smith Papyri’ considered fraudulent by most or all non-Mormon sources

—=—

I gotta laugh at anyone who dismisses Jesus christ because he is a Þctional character, while at the
same time silently consenting to allow this purely antichrist, non-self-evident institution to ßourish
in a world government based on the channeled wisdom of pretended, ascended masters. They say
the devilÕs greatest trick is to make you believe it doesnÕt exist. I say the greater trick is to cause men
to positively stop believing in (Loving) the authority and Law of self-Existence (Nature as the
Creation of Jehovah) Itself. What could be more satanic than that? For he who believes (loves) not
in his own, self-Existent soul will be ruled by the legal gods of non-Existence (id-entity), driven by
the false light (Luciferian in-formation) like predictable insects.

And one must ask the question: Who in their right mind would seek such a thing as inner peace in a
recognizably chaotic world? This is not a spiritual concept, but an escapist, satanic one. The Law of
God is not an inner peace or secret garden. For chaos is self-evidently the result of the Natural Law
of God speciÞcally not being followed by men in and out of authority. Christ does not teach inner
peace. Inner peace is not a Biblical concept. Inner peace is the chewing gum of cowards, a cherry-
ßavored babyÕs paciÞer Þtted for adults. Inner peace is feigned happiness regarding a painfully
intrusive splinter. Inner peace is the brainwashing that itÕs somehow normal to have a half-million
dollar mortgage (dead pledge) on property that is and can never be your own, and paying property
taxes, a student loan, and the national debt of CaesarÕs district on top of that. Inner peace is the set
of invisible shackles present on every cooperative slave. Inner peace is but one of many ÒNew AgeÓ
concepts borrowed from other eastern religions. It is the practice of meditative Yoga while trying
not to think about billions starving and suffering. Imagine having inner peace in the pain of burn-
ing hell described by the Catholic church, and perhaps you may begin to understand the
ridiculousness of this false paradigm of these New Age inÞltrators and artiÞcers.

The Works of a spiritual son of God (keeper of Law) are not expressed inwardly but outwardly.
Inner peace amongst chaos sounds more like a heavy shot of black-tar heroin cooked on a silver
spoon and delivered directly by injection into the blood stream to corrupt manÕs moral duty to
destroy what causes such chaos in the Þrst place. Inner peace is the ÒSomaÓ pill from Brave New
World, a vaccine for conscious reasoning.

—=—

ÒSwallowing half an hour before closing time, that second dose of soma
HAD RAISED A QUITE IMPENETRABLE WALL BETWEEN THE
ACTUAL UNIVERSE AND THEIR MINDS.”

ÒÉthe warm, the richly coloured, the inÞnitely friendly world of soma-
holiday. How kind, how good-looking, how delightfully amusing every
one was!”

!784
 “By this time the soma had begun to work. Eyes shone, cheeks were
ßushed, THE INNER LIGHT of universal benevolence broke out on
every face in happy, friendly smiles. Even Bernard felt himself a little
melted.”

“I don't understand anything," she said with decision, DETERMINED

TO PRESERVE HER INCOMPREHENSION INTACT. "Nothing. Least
of all," she continued in another tone, "why you don't take soma when
you have these dreadful ideas of yours. YOU'D FORGET ALL ABOUT
THEM. AND INSTEAD OF FEELING MISERABLE, YOU'D BE JOLLY.
SO JOLLY…”

“ALL THE ADVANTAGES OF CHRISTIANITY AND ALCOHOL;

NONE OF THEIR DEFECTS.”
—All separate quotes from Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’

—=—

Did I mention this is where your child’s “Common Core” public education materials are ultimately
sourced from? These wolves in sheep’s clothing of the Fabian and other societies of their own
secrets? And just what do we Þnd going on out there today in the public realm of re-education?

—=—

“Nearly 70 percent of Americans are on at least one prescription drug,

and more than half take two, Mayo Clinic researchers say.
ANTIBIOTICS, ANTIDEPRESSANTS AND PAINKILLING OPIOIDS
are most commonly prescribed, their study (in Mayo Clinic Proceedings)
found.”
—Science Daily article, June 19, 2013, Sourced from Mayo Clinic

—=—

“The 17th annual back-to-school survey just released by the National

Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse focused this year on use at
school -- and it's not good. For the sixth consecutive year, 60 PERCENT
OR MORE OF TEENS IN THE SURVEY REPORTED THAT DRUGS
ARE USED, KEPT OR SOLD AT SCHOOLS AND 52 PERCENT SAID
THERE'S A PLACE ON OR NEAR SCHOOL GROUNDS WHERE
STUDENTS GO DURING THE DAY TO USE DRUGS, DRINK OR
SMOKE CIGARETTES.”
—Survey by the center at Columbia University, national results, as reported in NewsTimes online, August 23, 2012

—=—

!785
It’s normal, you see? So normal, in fact, that kids now openly admit to and discuss it as normal,
something I would never have done 27 years ago in my own public high school.

The New American reports what most others will not, showing the integral connections to this grow-
ing beast system, which is impossible without a controlled, global education system:

“For over a year now, Americans have been up in arms over the Obama administration’s
unconstitutional efforts to bribe and bludgeon state governments into surrendering control
over K-12 education through the controversial so-called “COMMON CORE” national
standards — and the outrage is still growing. A peek beneath the surface, however, reveals that
the nationalization of American schools is actually just one component of a much broader
global agenda being pushed by the Obama administration, THE UNITED NATIONS, Bill
Gates, and others: THE GLOBALIZATION OF EDUCATION… For decades now, the
globalists at UNESCO and other UN outÞts have been openly plotting to impose what they
sometimes refer to as the “WORLD CORE CURRICULUM” on all of humanity. According to
the agency, IT IS ALL LINKED TO UN AGENDA 21 (NOW AGENDA 2030). IN ADDITION
TO GATHERING UP UNPRECEDENTED AMOUNTS OF DATA ON EVERYONE, the
global “education reform” movement is essentially seeking TO INSTILL RADICAL NEW
VALUES IN CHILDREN — turning them into “GLOBAL CITIZENS” WITH VIEWS
INHERENTLY AT ODDS WITH BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY — to facilitate the total
regimentation of human society. Countless programs and initiatives such as “Education for
All” are working toward that goal… Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan even boasts
openly that THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HE LEADS IS “COOPERATING”
WITH GROUPS SUCH AS THE UNITED NATIONS, often dubbed a “dictators’ club,” TO
“IMPROVE” EDUCATION IN AMERICA. In a 2010 speech to UNESCO, Duncan even
referred to the UN “education” agency as one of the administration’s “global partners” in the
effort TO GLOBALIZE SCHOOLING as part of the “CRADLE-TO-CAREER EDUCATION
AGENDA.” …In 2004, for example, on behalf of Microsoft, Gates personally signed a
“Cooperation Agreement” with UNESCO to accelerate the globalization of education
through information technology and communication… UNESCO Director General Koichiro
Matsuura gave a speech offering more insight into the plot. Among the goals of the
partnership, the UN agency boss explained: “fostering WEB-BASED COMMUNITIES of
practice INCLUDING CONTENT DEVELOPMENT AND WORLDWIDE CURRICULA
REFLECTING UNESCO VALUES.” As the document itself explains, “MICROSOFT
SUPPORTS THE OBJECTIVES OF UNESCO AS STIPULATED IN UNESCO'S
CONSTITUTION.” (For more on UNESCO values, see “Common Core and UN Agenda 21: Mass
Producing Green Global Serfs.”) …It may or may not be a surprise to many Americans to learn
that in a 2011 document about an advanced training program produced by UNESCO’s
International Institute for Educational Planning, the would-be global Department of
Education, even uses the term “COMMON CORE.” …UNESCO’s use of the term “Common
Core,” too, goes back decades. In 1984, for example — the same year President Ronald Reagan
withdrew U.S. participation from the UN agency Ñ the outÞt released a 51-page document
entitled “A Methodological Guide to the Application of the Notion of COMMON CORE IN
THE TRAINING OF VARIOUS CATEGORIES OF EDUCATIONAL PERSONNEL.” That
scheme was aimed at training teachers worldwide using the same standards, so that they, in
turn, could fan out across the globe to “educate” students all over the world. Even as far
back as the late 1940s, UNESCO was actively promoting the use of education as a means to
achieve what its Þrst Secretary General, JULIAN HUXLEY, described as “POLITICAL
UNIFICATION IN SOME SORT OF WORLD GOVERNMENT,” which he claimed was
“necessary.” In a 1949 PAMPHLET on using the classroom to promote “WORLD
UNDERSTANDING,” UNESCO said: “AS LONG AS THE CHILD BREATHES THE
POISONED AIR OF NATIONALISM, EDUCATION IN WORLD-MINDEDNESS CAN
ONLY PRODUCE PRECARIOUS RESULTS.” So, to deal with that, SCHOOLS SHOULD
USE VARIOUS MEANS TO “COMBAT FAMILY ATTITUDES.” Critics and analysts have
slowly started taking notice. “Some have decried COMMON CORE AS THE
NATIONALIZATION OF AMERICAN EDUCATION. Far more dangerous, however, is the

!786
 globalism of Common Core that demotes American values, undermines American
constitutional principles and DETACHES STUDENTS FROM THEIR FAMILIES AND
FAITH,” observed Catholic journalist and public speaker Mary Jo Anderson in a piece for
Crisis magazine. “Common Core is simply the newest attempt in the decades-old battle
(Outcome Based Education, Goals 2000) TO IMPOSE A U.N. GLOBALIST WORLDVIEW
aimed at ‘peace,’ sustainability and economic stability at the expense of freedom” …”

—Excerpted from The New American, ‘UN, Obama, And Gates Are Globalizing Education Through Common Core’

—=—

And you wonder why homeschooling is so demonized? For how might oneÕs child Þt into normal
society as a global citizen-ship of mammon if he or she isn’t exposed to the common core of
Luciferian doctrine? How can your child be so easily misguided, marked, and satanically branded
if he or she is taught the scriptures by responsible parents? This cannot be allowed… for one’s child
might grow up too intelligent to be used as live-stock for the global artiÞcers. The child given the
beneÞt of scriptural Law might not Þt in to the common beast system most children are publicly
entrained to accept and be employed (used) by. Normalization into this New Age, this Brave New
World, is key to its success. Hell doesn’t just happen in Nature.

In scripture, we are warned in triplicate to beware the wolf in sheep’s clothing, the enemy pre-
tending and extending its arm of friendship, as that which comes with the offer of peace and
security. For Jehovah offers no such platitudes, only the self-evident Law that might actually
sustain such a state of Being for all men in harmony with Nature. Peace is what each man makes,
for no artiÞcial person (corporation) built in the love of (belief in) mammon, even a global one, may
provide such spiritual rewards. To this global body politic, this beast of all beasts united, a
permanent war against the consciousness of men in christ and thus against the Law of Nature’s
God is its legally declared peace.

But how can you create world government unless you Þrst induce the commercial, agency relation-
ship of a public legal status to all men in all nations, especially to those “stateless” Jews used as
useful idiots to populate the latest, manufactured edition to that United Nations body called as
Israel? How do you globally, inter-nationally educate as one common core the people of Earth in the
principles and doctrines of such a dark light from that false liberator of the ßesh, Lucifer, unless
you Þrst make legal id-entities (anti-God) of all men? How else might such Òre-educationÓ be
legally forced (through the devils’ contract) upon all men in that agency, creating the ability to
withhold legal (artiÞcial) beneÞts, foodstuffs, and money to those who refuse such gifts of the light
of a Luciferian (adversarial) education and way of life bound by these Theosophical roots?

Let us hear from the host of the master herself, Alice A. Bailey, and from those in the know:

—=—

“These methods of overshadowing will largely be the ones used by the

Great Lord and his Masters AT THE END OF THE CENTURY, and for
this reason THEY ARE SENDING INTO INCARNATION, IN EVERY
COUNTRY, DISCIPLES who have the opportunity offered them to
respond to the need of training men and woman to recognize the higher
psych-ism, and the true inspiration and mediumship, and to do this
scientiÞcally. In Þfty years time, the need for true psychics and
conscious mediums (such as H.P.B. [Helena Petrova Blavatsky], for
instance) will be very great IF THE MASTERS' PLANS ARE TO BE

!787
CARRIED THROUGH TO FRUITION, AND THE MOVEMENT MUST
BE SET ON FOOT IN PREPARATION FOR THE COMING OF HIM
FOR WHOM ALL NATIONS WAIT.”
—Alice A. Bailey, from ‘A Treatise on Cosmic Fire,’ (pages 757-758)

—=—

“THE AIM OF PUBLIC EDUCATION IS NOT TO SPREAD

ENLIGHTENMENT AT ALL, IT IS SIMPLY TO REDUCE AS MANY
INDIVIDUALS AS POSSIBLE TO THE SAME SAFE LEVEL, TO
BREED AND TRAIN A STANDARDIZED CITIZENRY, TO PUT
DOWN DISSENT AND ORIGINALITY.”
–H.L. Mencken

—=—

 “The global agenda of the 21st century (Agenda 21) is set around
economy and trade, with manufacturing shifting from the west to the
east… In order to sustain their economic growth, developed as well as
developing economies NEED TO INTENSIFY THEIR HUMAN
CAPITAL FORMATION. Not surprising then, NATIONS ACROSS THE
WORLD ARE INCREASINGLY INVESTING IN EDUCATION FOR
CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR HUMAN CAPITAL… THE
RESPONSIBILITY TO SHAPE YOUNG MINDS AND PREPARE
THEM FOR A NEW WORLD RESTS ON EDUCATION. The world
needs to renounce some age old practices in its education system AND
ADOPT A FUTURISTIC PEDAGOGY… REINVENTING THEIR
EDUCATION SYSTEM IN LINE WITH THE UNFOLDING REALITIES
OF 21ST CENTURY, CORE is uniquely poised to… help nations
enhance the productive capabilities of their future workforce AND
CREATE IMMENSE VALUE FOR ALL ITS STAKEHOLDERS over
coming decades.”
—CORE Corporation, India, FY 2011-12 Annual Financial Report

—=—

“The quality of education given to the lower class MUST BE OF THE

POOREST SORT, SO THAT THE MOAT OF IGNORANCE
ISOLATING THE INFERIOR CLASS FROM THE SUPERIOR CLASS
IS AND REMAINS INCOMPREHENSIBLE TO THE INFERIOR
CLASS. With such an initial handicap, even bright lower class

!788
 individuals have little if any hope of extricating themselves their
assigned lot in life. THIS FORM OF SLAVERY IS ESSENTIAL to
maintain some measure of social order, peace, and tranquility FOR THE
RULING UPPER CLASS.”
—Excerpt from: ‘Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars’ (page 7)

—=—

ÒA really efÞcient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-

powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers
CONTROL A POPULATION OF SLAVES WHO DO NOT HAVE TO BE
COERCED, BECAUSE THEY LOVE THEIR SERVITUDE. TO MAKE
THEM LOVE IT IS THE TASK ASSIGNED, in present-day totalitarian
states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors AND
SCHOOLTEACHERS”… Most men and women WILL GROW UP TO
LOVE THEIR SERVITUDE AND WILL NEVER DREAM OF
REVOLUTION…”
—Aldous Huxley, from his ‘Brave New World’

—=—

“LUCIFER COMES TO GIVE US THE FINAL GIFT OF WHOLENESS.

IF WE ACCEPT IT, THEN HE IS FREE AND WE ARE FREE. THAT IS
THE LUCIFERIC INITIATION. IT IS ONE THAT MANY PEOPLE
NOW, AND IN THE DAYS AHEAD, WILL BE FACING, FOR IT IS AN
INITIATION INTO THE NEW AGE.”
ÑDavid Spangler, from his ÔReßections on the ChristÕ lecture series, a self-proclaimed Òpractical mysticÓ and Òclairvoyantly aware,Ó considered one of the founding
Þgures of the modern New Age movement; also a member of the Board of Directors for the United Nations “Planetary Citizens” organization

—=—

ÒWe must remember that the United Nations Charter opens with the
words, ‘WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS.’”
ÑDrafted, televised statement by the Secretary-General for United Nations Day celebration, 1975

—=—

“The United Nations is the greatest fraud in all History. ITS PURPOSE
IS TO DESTROY THE UNITED STATES.”
ÑCongressman John E. Rankin, as quoted from: ÔLone Star Rising: Lyndon Johnson & His Times, 1908Ð1960,Õ Dallek, R. (OUP, 1991) (page 505).

—=—

!789
In a perfect twist of fate, we Þnd here again that the words ÔWe the PeoplesÓ is not a referential to
common men, but to nations (i.e., districts of seizure, distraint, and distress) joined in union to the
central (federal) structure, the United Nations corporation. Nations are the members (artiÞcial
Peoples/States), not men. And so again, the common goyim of the nations are certainly not the
private ÒPeopleÓ therein. The United Nations is the centralization of all other central (national),
syndicalist, organized criminal estates of the private land pirates.

Author’s Note… Have no confusion here as to the intent of this work. One might stop to consider
that I have written this work staunchly opposed to nations, and that I would therefore support
such efforts at globalization, of a New Age of perfected commerce. This would, however, be a grave
fallacy of logic. I can think of nothing worse or antichrist, in fact, than bearing the mark and name
of a global government under this corporation (god) called the United Nations. And so I remind
the reader that I am merely the messenger, attempting to act christ-like in my presentation herein. I
seek not the destruction or violent tearing down of nations in any way. I seek only the voluntary,
reason and scripture (moral) based will of all men to be manifested without legal encroachment so
that each of us might leave her. For a principle is nothing without its agents, a kingÕs crown empty
without its subjects, and a nation (CaesarÕs district) dead without debt-slaves to charge it. Do not
let these nation-builders fool you into this new form of singular nationhood, as global citizenship,
for it is absolutely opposed to GodÕs self-evident Word. The cause of the problem is never a
solution to itself, and spiritual problems Truly have no political solutions. There is no spirit of
Jehovah to be found in the Luciferian Initiation and humanist doctrine (law) that is already at the
foundation of this corporate entity. For as the gods of all the nations are idols, the false gods of a
United Nations would together be the god of gods, the king of kings, the president of presidents,
the prime minister of prime ministers, the general of generals, the admiral of admirals, the congress
of congresses, the judge of judges, and the landlord of landlords. In other words, the antichrist of
the remainder of the sons of God and all who worship it as New Babylon.

It is in tribute to the Anti-Defamation LeagueÕs (ADLÕs) extensive participation in and creation of

Zionist ÒeducationalÓ propaganda and counterculture lesson-plans for public schools and
specialized, race-based misinformation lesson-plans in military colleges that I continue here,
including so much recent nonsense about gender neutrality and anti-bias materials, (Òanti-biasÓ
being a trademark of the ADL, and its excuse for the banning of many cherished books). The open
but publicly occulted history of world ZionismÕs fulÞllment of its own established legal state and
subsequent corruption of the global Christian, Jewish, and Muslim cultural structure and societal
law of nations towards one United Nations structure is being fulÞlled before our eyes. For out of
such created chaos and pointless war comes the incremental, chaotic rule of the satanic Order of the
Ages.

As to this declaration by the mystic spiritualist Balfour, it was in fact so transparent that the leaders
of the affected Arab populations considered it a violation of former treaties and the obvious precept
to a future declaration of war. It was instrumental in what is called the Arab-Israeli conßict, which
today remains intractable and likely will permanently remain unresolved. For the Arabs were
fooled by the British into revolting against the Ottoman Empire during World War I in exchange for
a protectionst treaty of that land in Palestine, just as worldwide Jewry has been fooled into
supporting Israel and its main goal of Aliyah (Hebrew: ‫ עֲלִיָּה‬aliyah, meaning "ascent") which is the
immigration of Jews from the nationless ÒdiasporaÓ (Greek διασ+ορά, meaning "scattering,
dispersionÓ) to the now legally declared Land of Israel (Hebrew: ‫ יִשְָׂראֵל‬Yisrā’el, Eretz Israel; Arabic:
ِ ‫سر‬
‫ائيل‬َ ْ ِ‫ إ‬Isrāʼīl). This notion of return, known as Òthe act of going upÓ towards Jerusalem is said to be
the fulÞllment of Òmaking AliyahÓ by moving to the land (unlawful state settlement) of Israel. This
act is at the heart of secular Zionism alone. IsraelÕs legal system of law allows the Òright of returnÓ
to all Jews of the world; an pretended refuge for an invented people.

However, since the notion of Jewishness extends to so many skin colors of so many actual races,
(because Jewishness is not a race) and because Israel is recognized internationally and by the
United Nations as a Òracist,Ó absolutely exclusionary state, there have been some conditions for
entry upon this supposed right of return that should make ones skin crawl. And such facts

!790
certainly don’t justify either US or “Christian” support of the modern, reinvented Jew or that
Jewish state…

Israel Forcibly Injected African Immigrants with Birth Control, Report Claims

January 28, 2013

This weekend, a report revealing that African women immigrating to Israel WERE
SUBJECTED TO MANDATORY CONTRACEPTIVE INJECTIONS, effectively amounting
to FORCED (IF TEMPORARY) STERILIZATION made global headlines.

SOME 130,000 ETHIOPIANS, MOST OF THEM JEWISH, LIVE IN ISRAEL. The community
experiences higher poverty and unemployment rates than the rest of the country's Jewish
population. In the past decade, the birth rate among Ethiopian-Israelis has declined by at
least 20 percent. Advocacy groups now claim this decline is the result of a birth control
regimen forced upon Ethiopian immigrant women.

According to an article in Haaretz, an Israeli news source…

ISRAEL HAS ACKNOWLEDGED THE ISSUE (WITHOUT ADMITTING ANY

WRONGDOING) and has vowed institutional changes in healthcare for immigrants. By
decree of Israel’s health minister, gynecologists have been ordered "not to renew
prescriptions for Depo-Provera for women of Ethiopian origin if for any reason there is
concern that they might not understand the ramiÞcations of the treatment.” Still, intense
scrutiny should be applied by women’s groups and international organizations to make sure
these changes are implemented in full. Moreover, more attention must be paid to the plight of
vulnerable African immigrants AROUND THE WORLD.

That Israel should allegedly engage in this activity is particularly shocking, considering the
practice was WIDELY USED BY THE GERMANS THROUGHOUT THE SHOAH. While the
scale and effects of these operations cannot be compared, Israel’s implicit intent to limit
‘burdensome’ (read: undesirable) portions of the population recalls the dark eugenics
experiments of World War II…

From a sociological perspective, this incident shows the strain between Israel’s religious
heritage and its modern political agenda. “Behold, the heritage of the Lord is sons, the reward
is the fruit of the innards. Like arrows in the hand of a mighty man, so are the sons of one's
youth.  Praiseworthy is the man who has Þlled his quiver with them,Ó the Torah proclaims.

The involuntary sterilization of African immigrants SUGGESTS THAT THE JEWISH

MORAL CODE (INEXTRICABLY CONNECTED WITH ISRAEL’S DOMESTIC LEGAL
CODES) CAN BE SELECTIVELY APPLIED TO THOSE WITH ‘DESIRABLE’
BACKGROUNDS. It is hard, indeed almost impossible to believe that an American Jewish
woman immigrating to Israel would be forced to take birth control.

—Article from Forbes magazine online, originally sourced from Haaretz of Israel, with headline, ‘Israel Admits Ethiopian Women Were Given Birth Control
Shots’ from January 27, 2013

—=—

While these “news” stories reveal the effects, they never tell you that injectable drugs such as
Depo-Provera are VACCINES against reproduction.

While this right of return was made law in the 1950’s for this synagogue of satanic Jews (those who
call themselves as the True Israelites but are not), the lesser known Palestinian “right of return” is
of course ignored and outlawed for this displaced people made refugees in their own land, mean-
ing that Palestinians are even barred from visiting their own family members. Now if the irony is

!791
lost on you here, what we are seeing here is that the over 750,000 Palestinians that were expelled
and thus were forced to leave their homes in and around 1948 to become political refugees as the
pretender Jews illegally moved into and forcibly settled their homes under this mythical Jewish
right of return pretended to be sanctioned by God, the same exact Palestinian right of return for
those now counted as refugees (in a created diaspora of their own) is denied by Israeli civil
(Talmudic) law. I guess the law of do unto others as you would have done to yourself doesn’t apply in
such an unlawfully gained legal (anti-God) state and false religious, atheistic, Talmudic culture as
this, any more than it applied to the American murder and decimation of so many Indian tribes.
For the commandments of God, transcribed by Moses, and fulÞlled by christ are certainly dead in
this spiritually barren land of Israel, even as the now completely Judaized, Zionist-inßuenced
America follows close behind without connection to its New Testament roots.

—=—

“And Jesus answered him, The Þrst of all the commandments is, HEAR,
O ISRAEL; THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD: And thou shalt love
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all
thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the Þrst commandment. And
the second is like, namely this, THOU SHALT LOVE THY
NEIGHBOUR AS THYSELF. THERE IS NONE OTHER
COMMANDMENT GREATER THAN THESE.”
—Mark 12: 29-31, KJB

—=—

ÒTherefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you,

do ye even so to them: FOR THIS IS THE LAW and the prophets. Enter
ye in at the strait gate: FOR WIDE IS THE GATE, AND BROAD IS THE
WAY, THAT LEADETH TO DESTRUCTION, AND MANY THERE BE
WHICH GO IN THEREAT: Because strait is the gate, and NARROW IS
THE WAY, WHICH LEADETH UNTO LIFE, AND FEW THERE BE
THAT FIND IT.”
—Matthew 7:12:14, KJB

—=—

Perhaps the most difÞcult, dissonant question one might not think to ask oneÕs Self is this: can the
way in which we do treat our neighbors, be they down the street or upon the other side of the
Earth, be a sign of how much or how little we Truly Love our Selves? With Self-Love being an
absolute part of the Law of Nature, perhaps we are charged in this era of scripturally prophetic
change not to Þx the problems of the ßesh and of the world, but to Þx and be reborn into our True
Selves. For no man would need or use any false persona (legal mask), surname, or other mark of
legal or religious sin (syn) lest that man hate his True Self, and seeks to spread that hate in inequity
towards his omnipresent neighbors. Are not the men that call themselves by the ßattering title of
“Jew” and the men that call themselves as “Palestinian” or “Arab” and the men that call
themselves as “Christian” Really just the nameless, ambiguous Creation of the same God and Its

!792
Nature? Are we not all thus bound by the same Law; not as some secular religion, but as the
spiritual, moral Law? Are we not all neighbors in some degree as we share in this Design of
Creation called Earth? Is not our Nature, our very Life-force and blood of the same self-Evident
Source?

—=—

“And then shall many be offended, AND SHALL BETRAY ONE

ANOTHER, AND SHALL HATE ONE ANOTHER. And many false
prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. AND BECAUSE INIQUITY
SHALL ABOUND, THE LOVE OF MANY SHALL WAX COLD.”
—Matthew 24:10-12, KJB

—=—

As with myself, while I Þnd myself present in the company of and questioning the Truth and intent
of those presupposing their own corporate “Christianity” as a legal, societal id-entity and supposed
status without adherence to scriptural Law or works, the outcasted and well-intentioned Jewish
messenger is often character-assassinated and otherwise falsely discredited ad hominem (kill the
messenger) while his message, as the Bible, is actively ignored, despite the overarching and self-
evident Truth espoused. He becomes styled as a Òself-hating Jew,Ó yet another clever trick of words
used by Zionist apologists, for open criticism is simply not allowed of that oxymoronic Jewish state.
Likewise, the typical public-minded US citizen-ship will respond just as fallaciously, as for instance
to tell the criticizer to get out of his country if you don’t like it, having no idea what they are
actually demanding. It is actually an amusing enterprise to ask them how exactly to do this, how to
give up oneÕs citizen-ship, and then invite them to look into it for you. Sometimes they might even
Þgure out the slave-system, and that citizen-ships are virtual prisoners of war in franchise (free-
dom) of commerce, commoners being mere sureties (live-stock) for the property of the United
States. But usually we Þnd just more of the same entrained cognitive dissonance that rules over the
ignorant mind.

There are no Truly ÒJewishÓ men any more than there are any Truly ÒChristianÓ men. No man is
born into Nature with any knowledge or title of religion, and ultimately one must abandon all titles
and religious doctrines in order to be reborn into GodÕs Nature. There is no actual ÒJewishÓ blood
any more than there is ÒChristianÓ blood. These are not races. They are not alive. And they
certainly are not a part of Nature (Jehovah). By comparison, there are also no Truly ÒSatanicÓ
people (psychopathy notwithstanding), just as there are no ÒatheistsÓ or Òanarchists.Ó Why? Be-
cause none of these are self-Existent in Nature. They are un-Real reactions to un-Real problems
designed to lead one to un-Real solutions. They are speciÞcally learned behaviors under false,
ßattering titles. There is no Life or substance within these empty names. The only True People
(men) that Exist are GodÕs Creation, and we are all a self-evident Truth that, in the end, cannot ever
be pretended away by Þction and its religions. God (Jehovah) and Nature obviously does not
divide men into religions and neither does Its Word; only men pretending false godhood via their
minced and artful words do this. Religions (corporations) are built merely upon word magic,
containing no substance of self-evidence. They exist only under the doctrines (legal laws) of the
nation they are created by, creations of men (in persona) within legal boundaries. They can never be
anything but legal (anti-God) entities (artiÞcial persons). And they serve no purpose under or for
God, for their purely secular existence would be a mere redundancy if they did, as their doctrine
(law) would necessarily according to scripture be the Bible alone, and under no circumstance
would they become legal corporations of CaesarÕs districts (nations).

And just as the True followers of the example of christ were thrown into the Roman colosseums to
be eaten by the lions for their non-conformity to the Latinized doctrines (laws) of the powers that
be, nothing can be more frightening to the spiritually driven man of today than such active,

!793
purposeful, and voluntary ignorance defended violently through cognitive dissonance as we see
happening now. Just as these “Jewish” authors have outwardly and publicly exposed their false
Zionistic counterparts in their organized, satanic endeavors, so too do I among others in this so-
called “Christian” nation Lovingly stand in contempt of this false, corporate “Christianity” so
inßuenced by the same. Zionism is merely patriotism for false gods, and is as ridiculous as
American exceptionalism. Zionism is as dangerous to these people residing in Israel as is the blind
patriotism of US citizen-ships (voluntary slaves) towards their own corporate masters. Intent is
always the target of these subverters, replacing it with some binding causality, as the stealing away
of spiritual, moral choice. And without choice, no morals can be measured in any man.

Man, in whatever ßattering religious denomination (noun/title) he may call himself in third person
while acting falsely (legally) under the state and under the false, legal title of “Christianity,”
certainly does not describe the actions of a man compared to his stated religious sentiment. The
title is not respected by God, only the actions taken by the believer (lover) of the Word (Son). One is
a follower of the Law (Son) or one is not. The title is useless. It is but a legal consideration and
status of a goyim, and there are plenty of atheistic “Jews” that are as well registered goyim of the
gods of the nations. For we all suffer from a lack of knowledge of the foundations of our scriptural
Law. But it means nothing to God, for God only judges the actions (verb) of man in his True state of
Being, not by his corporate Þction names and titles (nouns) acquired hypocritically without acting
in the part of that proclaimed title. Government, and by association any church as a corporation
under the legality and licensure of the state, serves no purpose but as a bar (barrier) to man’s
ability to actually Live and act in a spiritual Life, and especially to Þght against that which is
opposed to such a Truly religious, morally driven Life-style. Thus its nations in commercial unity
have formed the professional, international association by that very name: the International Bar
Association (IBA) to which most national and legal state associations are members.

—=—

“The International Bar Association, established in 1947, is THE

WORLD'S LEADING ORGANISATION OF INTERNATIONAL
LEGAL PRACTITIONERS, BAR ASSOCIATIONS AND LAW
SOCIETIES. The IBA INFLUENCES the development of
INTERNATIONAL LAW REFORM and shapes the future of the legal
profession THROUGHOUT THE WORLD. It has a membership of
more than 80,000 individual lawyers and MORE THAN 190 BAR
ASSOCIATIONS AND LAW SOCIETIES SPANNING OVER 160
COUNTRIES. It has considerable expertise in providing assistance to
THE GLOBAL LEGAL COMMUNITY.”
—International Bar Association website, from ‘about’ section

—=—

Of course globalism is just another word for universal legalism; a globally interconnected and
sanctioned legal matrix code.

It is interesting to note here that a court at bar can only ever deliberate whatever after-the-facts are
presented. It’s always a post-production, like a Hollywood movie, a judgement ceremony of magic
only ever performed post-event. All cases are a false re-presentation of a past moment in TIME, the
re-creation of the history of artiÞcial characters in legal form and register. All actual physical facts
in Nature happen outside of said court, before the court is ever in session. Court is always therefore
a post-Reality, a post-revelation of second-hand knowledge, and therefore impossible to be in

!794
accuracy. It is a house of lies legally made into truths, and its opinions are quoted as if they are
some permanence of Reality in other cases. These precedents of opinion are like a viscous disease
of the Þctional lives of legal persons, and so they effect the health of the men in surety to those
Þctional strawmen.

If the physical fact of a case was a sound that happened three months ago, like a gunshot heard by
a witness, then only words on paper as a description of that former (actual) sound as it actually
happened are the ÒfactsÓ of the case, but not the actual sound itself as it Truly happened. The fact
that the sound Existed in Nature can only be re-presented as purely an anecdotal story, a his-story.
Representation of fact is not Reality, similitude being in no way sameness, and so words of emotion
and fallacy may be used to make the perception of that fact (of the sound) seem better or worse
than it was when it actually, previously happened. This allows a sound to be deÞned as much
louder, softer, higher or lower in pitch, or more or less angry or aggressive in Nature than it
actually was at the time it happened, which is always in past history (his story). Every fact is only
ever opinion, unless that which is described as ÒfactÓ is self-evident and self-existent. Yet in the
legal realm of cartoon Þction even that which is self-evident, even Jehovah and Its Law can be
made to factually not exist. Problem, reaction, solutionÉ

If violence or murder by stabbing or gun shot is a physical fact of the case, these ÒfactsÓ can only be
placed into evidence as perceptions described through words. A word can never be the actual
sound, it can only describe and deÞne the form of the sound, never the substance. Thus, so many
legal crimes are pinned on the wrong person through merely these corruptible word-facts, and the
man as surety goes to jail in bondage to that wrongfully accused strawman person simply because
the words-as-facts are a perceptive lie made (declared) and thus conÞrmed as legally true. The
violence, the gunshot itself, obviously does not physically happen during the court proceeding. The
physical fact is thus only as Real as the Truth told about it in mere words. And a quite convincing
lie by a false-witness is certainly legal evidence of truth and fact in a system based on Þction. In fact,
some unscrupulous men did and still do make a Þnancial living (franchise) through the profession
of lying in court as a false witness. In the history of legal terms, these prostitutes as testiÞers-for-
hire were called men of straw, a known element among judges, whom also took and still take
bribes for their opinions.

MEN OF STRAW - Men who used in former days to ply about courts of law, so called from
their manner of making known their occupation, (i.e., by a straw in one of their shoes),
recognized by the name of "straw-shoes." An advocate or lawyer who wanted A
CONVENIENT WITNESS knew by these signs where to meet with one, and the colloquy
between the parties was brief. "Don't you remember?" said the advocate; to which the ready
answer was, "To be sure I do." "Then come into court and swear it." And straw-shoes went
into court and swore. Athens abounded in straw-shoes. (Black2)

STRAW MAN - 1. Draft or outline copy ready for suggestions and comments. 2. THIRD
PARTY USED AS A COVER IN ILLEGAL OR SHADY DEALS. 3. Nominee director. 4. A
weak or ßawed person WITH NO STANDING. Also called MAN OF STRAW. See judgment
proof. (Black2)

JUDGMENT-PROOF - A phrase that describes the PEOPLE AGAINST WHO A

JUDGEMENT OF A COURT WILL HAVE NO EFFECT as they will not be able to pay a debt
or to meet the demands of a judgement. (Black2)

JUDGMENT IN PERSONAM - A judgment against a particular person, as distinguished

from a judgment against A THING or a right or status. The former class of judgments are
conclusive only upon parties and privies; THE LATTER UPON ALL THE WORLD. (Black2)

—=—

!795
Today, we carry our own man of straw into court, agenticly appearing as illiterate fools in its
countenance. We lie about who and what we are in Nature, and we rat on ourselves as our own
political witness, though the maxim of law states that no man can be made to be a witness against
himself. But a strawman is bound to do so, to appear in straw-bail form, for it is a Þctional creation
of the law and its agent must account to its principal for all that it does in commerce, and the creator
controls. Man is protected by that spiritual maxim (by Natural Law), public persons are not. There is
no privacy in public places and within public personas.

The legal Þction court makes its own truth from a pronounced and proclaimed hyper-reality of
words, though the truth found by the court from these presented physical “facts” may very well be
lies about Reality magically turned into legal “truths.Ó Some are even admitted lies (Þctions)
considered as truths by force of law, for how else would the lie that is the court itself have power
unless it is perceived as the “true” decider of law and judgement? The lies of the liars decide what
is legally considered to be truth. Even the intentional, best-worded Truth from a completely honest
witness is still only a perception of a past Reality. It is but a well-told lie called truth. And a better
lie created purely from lies may defeat the truer tale.

In short, a court judge and jury can never offer anything else but its own opinion. It takes strict law
to force opinion into the conceit of truth. While God may only judge Reality, legality may only
judge perception caused by words called as “truth.” Truth, in name (in words of art) only, is never
Reality. And words are never self-evident Truth. What Exists as True is akin to Jehovah, and so
Truth is only what is in self-Existent Being (verb). Clint, Clint Richardson, or Doctor Richardson are
never True, for property is never True. What is of God’s Nature is God’s alone.

DELIBERATE - verb - To WEIGH, ponder, discuss, regard upon, consider. To examine, to

consult, IN ORDER TO FORM AN OPINION. To weigh in the mind; to consider the reasons
for and against; to consider maturely; reßect upon; as to deliberate a question; to weigh the
arguments for and against a proposed course of action. (Black4)

DELIBERATE - adjective - Well advised; carefully considered; not sudden or rash;

circumspect; slow in determining. Willful rather than merely intentional. Formed, arrived
at, or determined upon as a result of careful thought and weighing of CONSIDERATIONS,
as a deliberate judgment or plan; carried on coolly and steadily, especially according to a
preconceived design; given to weighing facts and arguments with a view to a choice or
decision; careful in considering the consequences of a step; slow in action; unhurried;
CHARACTERIZED BY REFLECTION; DISPASSIONATE; not rash. The word carries with it
an implication of some obstinacy, headstrongness, foolish daring, OR INTENTIONAL
WRONG DOING. By the use of this word, in describing a crime, the idea is conveyed that the
perpetrator weighs the motives for the act and its consequences, the nature of the crime, or
other things connected with his intentions, with a view to a decision thereon; that he carefully
considers all these: and that the act is not suddenly committed. It implies that the perpetrator
must be CAPABLE OF THE EXERCISE OF SUCH MENTAL POWERS as are called into use
by deliberation and the consideration and weighing of motives and consequences.
"Deliberation" and "premeditation" are of the same character of mental operations, differing
only in degree. Deliberation is but prolonged premeditation. In other words, in law,
deliberation is premeditation in a cool state of the blood, or, where there has been heat of
passion, it is premeditation continued beyond the period within which there has been time for
the blood to cool, in the given case. Deliberation is not only TO THINK OF BEFOREHAND,
which may be but for an instant, but the inclination to do the act is considered, weighed,
pondered upon, for such A LENGTH OF TIME after a provocation is given as the jury may
and was sufÞcient for the blood to cool. One in a heat of passion may premeditate without
deliberating. Deliberation is only exercised in a cool state of the blood, while premeditation
may be either in that state of the blood or in the heat of passion. (Black4)

DELIBERATELY - Willfully; WITH PREMEDITATION; intentionally; purposely; IN COLD

BLOOD. (Black4)

!796
 COLD BLOOD - UNDISTURBED USE OF REASON; calm deliberation. See Cooling Time.
(WCA1889)

OPINION - A document prepared by an attorney for his client, embodying his understanding
of the law as applicable to a state of facts submitted to him for that purpose. The statement
by a judge or court of the decision reached in regard to a cause tried or argued before them,
expounding the law as applied to the case, and detailing the reasons upon which the
judgment is based. The words "decision" and "opinion" do not have same meaning, a
“decision” of a court being its judgment, and ITS “OPINION” BEING REASONS GIVEN
FOR JUDGMENT. (Black4)

OPINION EVIDENCE - Evidence of what the witness thinks, BELIEVES, or infers in regard
to facts in dispute, as distinguished from his personal knowledge of the facts themselves;
not admissible except (under certain limitations) in the case of experts. That which is given by
a person of ordinary capacity who has by opportunity for practice acquired special knowledge
outside limits of common observation, of value in elucidating a matter under consideration. In
the law of evidence, opinion is an inference or conclusion drawn by a witness from facts
some of which are known to him and others assumed, or drawn from facts which, though
lending probability to the inference, DO NOT EVOLVE IT BY A PROCESS OF
ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY REASONING. An inference necessarily involving certain facts
may be stated without the facts, the inference being an equivalent to a speciÞcation of the
facts; but, when the facts are not necessarily involved in the inference (e.g., when the inference
may be sustained upon either of several distinct phases of fact, neither of which it necessarily
involves), then the facts must be stated. (Black4)

CONCEIT - noun [Latin, TO TAKE OR SEIZE.] 1. CONCEPTION; that which is

CONCEIVED, IMAGINED, or FORMED IN THE MIND; idea; thought; IMAGE. In
laughing there ever precedeth a conceit of somewhat ridiculous, and therefore it is proper to
man. 2. Understanding; power or faculty of conceiving; apprehension; as a man of quick
conceit [Nearly antiquated]. How often did her eyes say to me, that they loved! Yet I, not
looking for such a matter, had not my conceit open to understand them. 3. OPINION; notion;
fancy; IMAGINATION; fantastic notion; as a strange or odd conceit. SEEST THOU A MAN
WISE IN HIS OWN CONCEIT? THERE IS MORE HOPE OF A FOOL THAN OF HIM.
Proverbs 26:5. 4. Pleasant fancy; gayety of imagination. On the way to the gibbet, a freak took
him in the head to go off with a conceit. 5. A striking thought; affected or UNNATURAL
CONCEPTION. Some to conceit alone their works conÞne. 6. FAVORABLE OR SELF-
FLATTERING OPINION; a lofty or vain conception OF ONE’S OWN PERSON OR
ACCOMPLISHMENTS. By a little study and A GREAT CONCEIT OF HIMSELF, HE HAS
LOST HIS RELIGION. Out of conceit with, not having a favorable opinion of; no longer
pleased with; as, a man is out of conceit with his dress. Hence to put one out of conceit with,
is to make him indifferent to a thing, or in a degree displeased with it. - verb transitive - To
conceive; TO IMAGINE; to think; to fancy. THE STRONG, BY CONCEITING
THEMSELVES WEAK, THEREBY RENDERED INACTIVE. (Webs1828)

—=—

When we judge others, do we not put them into our own conceit, even as we attempt to judge them
out of it? Is this not the ultimate conceit of man? Do we judge their own actions or do we judge our
own persona? Are we Truly able to cast the Þrst stone by our own innocence? Is our judgement
helping or condemning to man? And when we are legally (without God’s Law) judged by our
original, ancestral sin (origin/source of legal status and title) and thus doomed through the birth-
abandonment process into public person-hood, are we not made weak and inactive as any man
would be that we may judge and punish?

Ironically, when we are called to jury, it is our own persona of self-conceit — our own falsely
projected self-image as “moral persons” in citizen-ship — that are called to sit. We are thus called
as agents of the false law, or more accurately, summoned demons in support of the devil’s contract.

!797
 And we do not judge the defendant as a man, but as a Þctional person (status) bound under legal
law. Not morally, but artiÞciallyÉ We do not judge the man, we judge his performance in persona
without True intent, as a strawman under the strict law of other men (masters/gods). Slaves
judging slaves. Debtor upon debtor applying opinionated, state sanctioned false-morals over and
out of conceit of GodÕs Law.

But heyÉ thatÕs just the way it is, right?

If you hurry, you can catch American Idol or Dancing With The Stars. After all, you judge those
performers just as you do the citizen actors in the person of government on TV and in court now
donÕt you Ñ with ignorance and conceit of GodÕs Law?

The Reality is that we all make each other extremely weak through our own legal conceit
(imagination) of each other. And that is exactly where the church and state wishes us to be,
controllable by the Þction of mere legal opinion, judging and inÞghting amongst ourselves so that
the puppet-masters in their secured pirate cove are never Þngered.

Ñ=Ñ

“Opinion has caused more trouble on this little earth than plagues or
earthquakes.”
—Voltaire

Ñ=Ñ

“Judgments are, as it were, the sayings of the law, AND ARE

RECEIVED AS TRUTH.”
—JUDICIA SUNT TANQUAM JURIS DICTA, ET PRO VERITATE ACCIPIUNTUR. “2 Inst. 537. (Black4)

Ñ=Ñ

“Judges are not bound to explain the reason of their sentence.”

JUDICES NON TENENTUR EXPRIMERE CAUSAM SENTENTIAE SUAE. Jenk. Cent. 75. (Black4)

Ñ=Ñ

To be clear, opinion evidence is not admissible in court. And yet, somehow, the judgement of the
court is based upon the opinion of the judge and/or jury. So we are literally ruled by the opinions
of self-professed experts Ñ professors (speakers) of the law. They are godheads; the administrators
of their own re-creation. It is indeed the opinion of this author that no moral man, and especially no
follower of christÕs teachings, can justify sitting as judge or jury over other men. The Law of God is
speciÞcally moral and designed to be against those teachings. Therefore no judge or jury can
possibly be my peer or my superior if I profess the Law of God. And thatÕs the point! This is the
notion of possessing, acting in, and thus declaring only the Highest Law, of becoming a son (Word)
of God. A civil, legally created judge (magistrate god) cannot be qualiÞed to judge my actions
unless I abandon my own Nature. For as a titled, legal creation of man he can in no way be a man
of God. A judge is purely a legal entity; a corruption of GodÕs Nature. He is acting as nothing more
than a Þctional person with a Þctional legal title, given authority only under color of legal law. God
respects no person, and neither should we.



Thus we may know the reason behind the scriptural Law that Jehovah is to be manÕs only judge. By
following the law without error, license, or indulgence, we may indeed parabolically judge our

!798
own actions before we commit to them. But please understand, this is exactly what citizenship is, a
pre-judgement and public wager upon each man that he will not follow God’s Law and instead
habitually sin under manÕs offered artiÞcial womb (legal matrix) of Þctional protections and
Þnancial securities. In other words, he is caused to be bound to Þctional gods and their laws
because he does not respect the Real One. He is unable to self-govern through christ’s story, by
GodÕs Word (law).

A leader is or at least can be a man of God. A ruler is always a Þctional status of man. We must
know the difference. Christ was portrayed as a leader, not a ruler. One is either led by moral law or
ruled by an amoral legal code.

—=—

“He that is without sin among you, let him Þrst cast a stone at her.”
—John 8:7, KJB

—=—

He that is without syn (artiÞce); without legal name and number, mark and ßattering title. He that
is not already pre-judged (doomed) in their nativity, who has not accepted the name and number of
a beast, cast your stone.

This paradoxical statement is much deeper than we can imagine. For how may any man judge
another without some burden of artiÞce (sin)? How may a judge exist without the sin (syn) of
legalized personhood and ßattering title? Syn is the Greek preÞx signifying to be together, in fusion,
or united with some thing. But remember, to be out of sin (syn) we are to imagine ourselves to be no
thing. So how does one imagine oneself to be God (judge) or have such God-given authority to
judge as a lesser god? For this is not the way of the Natural Law. What judgement of any man is not
to receive forgiveness according to christ? And what Law may a man be judged by but GodÕs,
which requires no such judgement in worldly things? Here again we can see that the ability to
speak in parables (parabolically) is the ability to defeat all enemies. This means to never have or
admit to certainties (prejudices), in any aspect of art and Þction, to never respect what is not Real
(of God). But will such rational thought cause men to cease casting their stones and moral
stumbling blocks at each other? Of course not, for the multitudes of men are born and educated as
fools, and a parable in the mouth of fools has no value. We can only act by example. There are no
guarantees, no insurances, and no protections from psychopathy and logic-based causality. We
must not become like them after we are reborn into our Selves under Nature and Its Law. We cannot
judge when there is no legal (artiÞcial) thing or persona to judge, and no place (Þctional, legal
jurisdiction) to do so.

Apparently all court decisions and opinions are necessarily done in cold blood. For certainly a judge
never considers his own artiÞce in his false judgement of others; his own sin. He only judges the
actions of the person, not the man, for his legal law only applies to the artiÞcial, legal person. No
blood runs through any judge in artiÞce, for no Life Exists in such ßattering titles. To judge names
and other words is to judge only Þction, try as they may to establish some moral principle over
their actions. But this is an impossibility, for a judge must be cold and amoral by law in his
judgements of Þctional persons, places, and things. His law is the very origin and licensure of sin.

—=—

“It matters not what is known to the judge, 


IF IT IS NOT KNOWN TO HIM JUDICIALLY.”
—Non refert quid notum sit judice si notum non sit in forma judici. 3 Buls. 115. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

!799
 —=—

“The judge must see that no order be made or judgment given or

sentence passed either more harshly or more mildly than the case
requires; he must not seek renown, either as a severe or as a tender-
hearted judge.”
— RESPICIENDUM EST JUDICANTI NE QUID AUT DURIUS AUT REMISSIUS CONSTITUATUR QUAM CAUSA DEPOSCIT; NEC ENIM AUT
SEVERITATIS AUT CLEMENTIAE GLORIA AFFECTANDA EST. (Black4)

—=—

If a judge knows you are innocent by personal experience or knowledge, he cannot declare it or
present it in court, even while sentencing your person (districted property) to life in prison. He
must recuse himself if his moral compass — his religious belief (Love) gets in the way. For it’s only
the life of the person (status) that is in consideration, not Reality. Morals have no place in corporate
affairs over artiÞcial constructs. ItÕs kind of like killing the enemies in a video game. No moral
thought or barriers needed. We (persons) simply are not Real. A false witness giving false
testimony is more powerful than the judges actual knowledge, for the judge only considers what is
presented as legal accepted evidence. Fiction reigns.

I warn people all the time that emotion has no place in the legal realm, for no emotions and no
souls Exist there. There is no True Love to be found, for as we will discover, love is not a recognized
concept in the legal language except for fraudulent purposes, as the using of its power and purpose
only for evil intent. Love is illegal in the legal realm. Judges, apparently, are also supposed to be
cold-blooded as they de-liberate the fate of man in doom and judgement with their professional
(professed) opinions as decisions given under false ßattering titles in the ofÞce of their Þctional
persona, no doubt considering as well the monetary value of men as prisoners made to voluntarily
participate in the prison labor industry for slave wages that beneÞt only the state and its contracted
private-prison corporations. To de-liberate a case means to take what is at liberty (Reality: the Real
answers to questions as opposed to the consideration of evidential and circumstantial facts versus
Reality) and to chain what is that self-evidently known Reality to a re-considered, cold-blooded
opinion based merely on some monetarily re-presentative value of It. Hence the legal opinion and
decision can only have effect on a man standing in person with corruption of blood in a citizen-
ship. The liberty of what actually Is must be stolen, as that Reality becomes set into the fact of
opinionated legal words. These words become the Þgurative opinion of “the law” for which the
judge artiÞcially represents as its agent, created by one manÕs persona and enforced upon another
manÕs persona. And man must also relinquish his own liberty for the beneÞt of this ÒprotectionÓ of
person-hood, sealing his fate to be thereby judged by men acting as gods. In other words, a judge is
the false, corporeal re-presentation in personiÞcation of a Supreme god, created by the Þctional law.
The judge is the voice in agency of that voiceless legal law, while the Executive (president, govern-
or, and county Sheriff) is the representation of GodÕs wrath in the guise of the military force behind
it, without which the voice would be pointless and without respect. Violent (executive) force is the
only reason for this respect of legal law by the subjects (voluntary slaves) to it. Reality re-presented
in any form is still non-Existent in law. Words (Þctions) are never Reality. The respect is not
Natural. The consent is manufactured like a witches brew.

“Rights” may also certainly be said to not Exist in Reality, for rights come only from the
imagination of men. “Rights” exist only in a legal and religious (ecclesiastical) form. They don’t
grow on trees. They cannot be plucked from the earth. They cannot be Þshed from the sea. God did
not Create them, though the name of God is used falsely to justify their legal existence as ÒGod-
given.” But they certainly aren’t tangible or physical in any way. Men must believe in (Love) and
abide by GodÕs Law and consciously apply it towards all other men for negative rights to have
constructive use. In this way, the Natural duty extinguishes the need for a declared Þctional right,
for no right is needed if all men keep their negative, Natural Law duty to all other men and to
Nature Itself.

!800
In other words, no positive law is needed if the negative law is at all times adhered to. And this
must be the basis of any society of men.

—=—

“The Constitution is not an (positive) instrument for the government to

restrain the people, it is an (negative) instrument FOR THE PEOPLE TO
RESTRAIN THE GOVERNMENT — lest it come to dominate our lives and
interests.”


—Patrick Henry, American colonial revolutionary, (italicized emphasis mine) added.

—=—

Adding the words positive and negative above makes quotes such as these much easier to
understand in relation to the negative fundamentals of the unenforceable (negative) Natural Law
versus that of man’s legal, positively enforced law. Only a private man would understand this
“revolutionary” statement of old, for only a private man in Reality has anything to lose. Only he its
privately educated as to how government works. Only the private man has reserved his Natural
(negative) God-given Rights to be left alone. The US constitution, in other words, only restrains
government from private citizens. But for public citizenships (property), all law is positive and
distrains and distresses by force. For he that is already seized (under Caesar’s district) and set free
in commercial franchise is already in prison, the open-air debtor’s hell of mammon.

—=—

“Generally the Constitution is A CHARTER OF NEGATIVE LIBERTIES.

[It] says what the states CAN’T do to you. [It] says what the federal
government CAN’T do to you, BUT [IT] DOESN’T SAY WHAT THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OR STATE GOVERNMENT MUST DO ON
YOUR BEHALF.”
—President Barack Obama

—=—

In other words, the constitution gives nothing, bestows no rights, and only respects and protects
what has not been previously given away, as reserved, “God-given,” Natural rights. But more
importantly, by its word-magic and artful trickery, it may call any tyranny, any crime against
Nature, and any extortion schema it may create as a beneÞt, a protection, or a necessity. It may
harm or kill you, in other words, on your behalf. That is, if you have not reserved your negative
rights and immunities from and without contract to it. A subject is never Naturally free from its
masterÕs bestowed beneÞts, for a subject must abandon his Creator God to become subject to
Þctional gods (creators), and the creator controls.

Of course this quoted statement, as accurate as it is, made the idiocracy of patriotic public citizen-
ships and the shock-jocks that purposefully or without knowledge mislead them quite angry. For as
the blind leading the blind, they know not the public dis-ease they have contracted, they
comprehend not their status in publicity even while tacitly under-standing it, unable to fathom that
the constitution only limits government from harming private citizens, not goyim under public
contract. And yet if this perfectly truthful statement can just be comprehended by the public mass
of illiterates (the public people in citizenship to the United States), then they would suddenly
understand why the government abuses them so much. They would Þnally recognize their own
voluntary enslavement, and that all their so-called rights are a positive, contracted dis-ease.

The following court case shows that public, US citizens are not privileged by the constitution(s):

!801
 “The right of trial by jury in civil cases, guaranteed by the 7th Amendment (Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90 ,
23 L. ed. 678), and the right to bear arms, guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment (Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 , 29
L. ed. 615, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 580), HAVE BEEN DISTINCTLY HELD NOT TO BE PRIVILEGES AND
IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES, guaranteed by the 14th Amendment
against abridgment by the states, and in effect THE SAME DECISION WAS MADE IN
RESPECT OF the guaranty against prosecution, except by indictment of a grand jury, contained
in the 5th Amendment (Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516 , 28 L. ed. 232, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 111, 292), [211 U.S. 78, 99] AND IN
RESPECT OF THE RIGHT to be confronted with witnesses, contained in the 6th Amendment
(West v. Louisiana, 191 U.S. 258 , 48 L. ed. 965, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 650). In Maxwell v. Dow, supra, where the plaintiff in
error had been convicted in a state court of a felony upon an information, and by a jury of eight
persons, it was held that the indictment, made indispensable by the 5th Amendment, and the trial
by jury, guaranteed by the 6th Amendment, WERE NOT PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF
CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES, as those words were used in the 14th Amendment. The
discussion in that case ought not to be repeated. All the arguments for the other view were
considered and answered, the authorities were examined and analyzed, and the decision rested
upon the ground THAT THIS CLAUSE OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT DID NOT FORBID THE
STATES TO ABRIDGE THE PERSONAL RIGHTS ENUMERATED IN THE FIRST EIGHT
AMENDMENTS, because those rights were not within the meaning of the clause 'privileges and
immunities of citizens of the United States.' If it be possible to render the principle which
governed the decision more clear, it is done so by the dissent of Mr. Justice Harlan. We conclude,
therefore, that the exemption from compulsory self-incrimination IS NOT A PRIVILEGE OR
IMMUNITY OF NATIONAL CITIZENSHIP guaranteed by this clause of the 14th Amendment
against abridgment by the states.”

“The defendants, however, do not stop here. They appeal to another clause of the 14th
Amendment, and insist that the self-incrimination which they allege the instruction to the jury
compelled was a denial of due process of law. This contention requires separate consideration, for
it is possible that some of the personal rights safeguarded by the Þrst eight Amendments
against national action may also be safeguarded against state action, because a denial of them
would be a denial of due process of law. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. Chicago, 166 U.S. 226 , 41 L. ed. 979, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 581.
If this is so, IT IS NOT BECAUSE THOSE RIGHTS ARE ENUMERATED IN THE FIRST
EIGHT AMENDMENT(S), BUT BECAUSE THEY ARE OF SUCH A NATURE THAT THEY ARE
INCLUDED IN THE CONCEPTION OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW. Few [211 U.S. 78, 100] phrases of
the law are so elusive of exact apprehension as this. Doubtless the difÞculties of ascertaining its
connotation have been increased in American jurisprudence, where it has been embodied in
constitutions and put to new uses as a limit on legislative power…”



“The words 'due process of law' 'were intended to secure the individual from the arbitrary
exercise of the powers of government, UNRESTRAINED BY THE ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES
OF PRIVATE RIGHTS AND DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE.' Bank of Columbia v. Okely, 4 Wheat. 235, 244, 4 L. ed. 559, 561
(approved in Hurtado v. California, 110 U.S. 516, 527 , 28 S. L. ed. 232, 235, 4 Sup. Ct. Rep. 111, 292; Leeper v. Texas, 139 U.S. 462, 468 , 35 S. L. ed. 225,
227, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 577; Scott v. McNeal, 154 U.S. 34, 45 , 38 S. L. ed. 896, 901, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1108). 'This court has never
attempted to deÞne [211 U.S. 78, 102] with precision the words 'due process of law.' ÉIt is sufÞcient
to say that there are certain immutable principles of justice which inhere in the very idea of free
government which no member of the Union may disregard.' Holden v. Hardy, 169 U.S. 366, 389 , 42 S. L. ed. 780, 790,
18 Sup. Ct. Rep. 383, 387. 'The same words refer to that law of the land in each state, which derives its
authority from the inherent and reserved powers of the state, exerted within the limits of those
fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political
institutions.' Re Kemmler, 136 U.S. 436, 448 , 34 S. L. ed. 519, 524, 10 Sup. Ct. Rep. 930, 934. 'The limit of the full control
which the state has in the proceedings of its courts, both in civil and criminal cases, is subject only
to the qualiÞcation that such procedure must not work a denial of fundamental rights or conßict
with speciÞc and applicable provisions of the Federal Constitution.' West v. Louisiana, 194 U.S. 258, 263 , 48 S. L.
ed. 965, 969, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 650, 652.”

—Twining v. State of New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78, 98 (1908)

—=—

!802
Positive (property-based) law is not negative (ambiguity-based) law. Positive law is an addition,
while a negative law is an absence of application or attachment. They are as repulsive to each other
as magnets can be when forced together against their Natural states. The negative repulses the
positive, and negative (spiritual Law) is superior to the positive (contractual law). This is similar to
the exclusion principle that dictates two electrons in an atom cannot occupy the same energy state, or
cannot be charged by the same force of power simultaneously. A negative right is only the right to
not have positive rights forced or charged upon us. Private persons are negative persons of each
State in the purview of federal (US) law. The public is purely positive, and public persons are
bound by the right to have positive law forced (charged) upon their public personas (property)
simply because they are not acting privately (negatively) within those Natural duties that it
presumes to do no harm to others and their property. And so the government does horrible things
under this positive application of law Òon our behalf,Ó for its own proÞt and gain as the excuse of
tyrants old and new.

A tree must be destroyed to create artiÞcial, positive rights with legal ink upon its dead pulp we
call as paper, while a negative right is self-evident; a Law of Nature. Legal rights (in name only) are
artfully worded lies told and contractually established by a few men in order to break with GodÕs
Natural Law and negative duty to It and others, to either protect themselves from the tyranny of a
few men, or to claim the legal right to become the few tyrants over all other contracted men. No
rights Exist in Nature. They have no Natural Source, no original, except in man's simulacrum of
his legalese of nomenclature. They are not created by God and Nature as written words or ideas,
for Nature and its Creator does not create or recognize words, legal names, or titles, which are of
course required to claim a legal right. A negative right is merely the non-existence of legal rights,
which positively tread on the negative duty of non-interference and “do no harm” principles. Legal
or civil rights only apply to persons, not men. To claim a legal right, man must abandon God and
act only in false persona (artiÞcial, positive status) to therefore be bound by the legal law of
persons.

—=—

“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within

limits drawn around us BY THE EQUAL RIGHTS OF OTHERS. I do
not add 'within the limits of the law' BECAUSE LAW IS OFTEN BUT
THE TYRANT'S WILL, AND ALWAYS SO WHEN IT VIOLATES THE
RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL.”
—Thomas Jefferson

—=—

Here again, Jefferson is speaking of negative law in Òunobstructed actionÓ through that respect of
the duty to all others to not obstruct or infringe upon their own moral actions. Only consent to
manÕs positive law can defeat the self-evident Truth of the negative duties to all, the Natural Law of
Jehovah. Self-responsibility requires self-governance under GodÕs Law of Nature.

As a disclaimer, I use quotes by these so-called “founding fathers” with hesitation and perspective
care. I do so only bearing in mind that, while so fervently decrying tyranny in favor of their own
private liberty and ensuring it for that of their bloodline of “posterity,” these signers created a legal
system that allowed and regulated the legal slavery and forced bondage of others not of their own
progeny (genealogy, as speciÞcally deÞned legal Òwhite personsÓ). They allowed by law the taking,
valuation, and purchasing (conquering) of “negroes” from another continent, and claimed the same
continued ownership of that already established bondage of slavery for their offspring. And so the
lesson, the moral of this American story and its legal creators (founder-gods) is that when liberty is
obtained only at the cost of any othersÕ liberty, even that of one individual, it is not True moral,

!803
negative, or Natural (Lawful) Liberty under God. Slavery and its protection as a commercial inter-
course was one of the stated purposes if incorporating this United States of America, even while
ÒGodÓ was shamefully invoked as its purpose and justiÞcation of establishment. The only way to
justify slavery is through the legal artiÞce (i.e., the assignment of Þctional, legal status), which the
constitution established as a rightful and permissive positive violation of the negative Natural Law.
The lesser oppressor often complains about his own tyrants (kings) even as he oppresses others
under those higher tyrantÕs permissive laws and customs. This is the True story of the United
States. It cannot be changed or altered for entertainment or educational purposes, though efforts
have certainly been made. Even those who stood against slavery conceded to and signed it in the
end, which is the same as promoting and participating in it. This is inexcusable.

But most amazing to this author is that those bloodlines of private landholders today, after their
enfranchisement (setting free) of all commoners and slaves into one status of national citizenship,
still technically hold all of us common US persons in bondage and voluntary servitude. I am
amazed simply because the ignorance of this fact is the very religious foundation of patriotism, of
Godless idol worship under the Þction that is the United States, its founders, and through to their
modern progeny. Let us never forget that all the gods of the nations are idols…

We can either choose to dismissively belittle or worship these quotes stated by the free men of the
several States (Peoples) like idiots, or we can choose to learn from their deeper meaning by
applying our knowledge of the status of private versus public citizens in comprehension of their
True intent. We must consider perspective, which means that their words only applied to their own
bloodline, their own class, not to their peopled common live-stock. Only a fool would ignore some-
thing based upon their conceit of its goodness or badness instead of learning from its actual
application.

One cannot understand or imagine heaven without having equal knowledge of hell. One cannot be
protected from evil by simply ignoring it in hope and expectation that good will prevail. One
cannot simply pray evil away without taking action against it. And this is why the Bible instructs
us to put no faith in any man and call no man father, and that includes these hypocrites we
parabolically call as the Þctional Òfounding fathers.Ó

Never forget that slavery, in the form of voluntary servitude, is very much alive in the United
States. The 13th amendment is clear that, since the end of the civil war, only voluntary slavery and
servitude is constitutional. Just as an external hard drive is an impressionable slave to its master
computer’s operating system, so too is a public person (property) a slave to its principal’s legal
code.

There are no spells or spellings in Nature, no deÞnitions, no constitutions, no written laws. There
are not even any straight lines! These are mortal devices; created for dead pledges in consensual
allegiance to Þctional authority Þgures. Rights are only of the social, of society, and can only be
obtained in a public (Þctional) forum and only in cursed form without substance. And to be clear,
for one individual to obtain a legal (anti-God) right, some other class of individual or non-legal
man must be denied that same right. This is antichrist behavior, called as inequity, and is rewarded
only in the artiÞce of mammon and its false valuation. The US Code, however, calls this as Òequal
rights.Ó The public cannot effect the private without untamed force, claiming it as their positive
legal right, which is against each man’s Natural moral duty to all other men. Positive (legal) rights
are and can only be socialist (public). For a man to claim civil or other rights as his own, he must
Þrst conceit to become Naturalized and/or be birthed into and in conÞrmation of a public,
socialized, civilized persona as an obedient citizen to the source of those public rights, away from
his True God (Origin of Source), and therefore must accept all obligations of the legal creator of
those rights. Only a Þction can have and hold Þctional things such as rights. A legal right is not a
duty, and merely deÞnes a legal contractual obligation per other entities. A legal duty is merely a
tax. A right is taken, never given. It is the private responsibility of adhering to the negative duty
under God’s Law (to do no harm) that protects private men and their only duty to each other,
which creates the right not to be forced by other men to do anything and to do unto other men as
they would have them do unto you.

!804
This is the essence of Natural Law. One needs not governmental, legal law if one fulÞlls this
negative state of Being (verb) in Natural Law only. And this is vastly different than the public law
which we say is positively created, as the source of one’s (strawman’s) so-called legal rights…

POSITIVE LAW - Law actually and speciÞcally enacted or adopted BY PROPER

AUTHORITY for the government of an organized jural society. "A 'law,' in the sense in
which that term is employed in jurisprudence, IS ENFORCED BY A SOVEREIGN
POLITICAL AUTHORITY. It is thus DISTINGUISHED NOT ONLY FROM ALL RULES
WHICH, like the principles of MORALITY and the so-called laws of HONOR and of
fashion, ARE ENFORCED BY AN INDETERMINATE AUTHORITY, but also FROM ALL
RULES ENFORCED BY A DETERMINATE AUTHORITY which is either, on the one hand,
SUPER-HUMAN, or, on the other hand, politically subordinate. In order to emphasize the
fact that 'laws' in the STRICT sense of the term, ARE THUS AUTHORITATIVELY
IMPOSED, THEY ARE DESCRIBED AS POSITIVE LAWS.” (Black4)

Whatever your romanticized opinion of this government, you must know that by their own ofÞcial
opinions and timeless deÞnitions its law is against morals, against reasoning, against honor, and
thus against spirituality under God.

—=—

“Positive rules of law [AS DISTINGUISHED FROM MAXIMS

(PRINCIPLES OF LAW) OR CONCLUSIONS OF REASON] will be
receded from [given up or dispensed with] rather than that crimes and
wrongs should remain unpunished.”
—RECEDITUR A PLACITIS JURIS, POTIUS QUAM INJURIAE ET DELICTA MANEANT IMPUNITA. Bac. Max. 55, reg. 12. (Black4)

—=—

Sounds good on the surface, does it not? But what happens when license is given so that such
crimes and wrongs are legal and thus positively accepted? What happens when a judge declares
what is criminal and wrong as what is actually legal and right? All it takes is a contract of person-
hood in agency and like a magic spell the black-robed, administrative devilmaster’s (attorney’s)
legal words apply. The Þction becomes law, for without law no Þctions may exist.

Notice Þrst and foremost that the indeterminate, God-given (negative) lawful authority and manÕs
determinate positive law authority are unnaturally mixed to create a Þctionally positive law, just as
the christian and surname are so admixed. For the church and state must support each other to
justify their combinations (conspiracy/confederations) of powers to rule, just as the right and the
left, the Democrat and the Republican parties prop each other up while pretending competition for
the beneÞt of the masses of illiterates. Both are of the false law. And the illusion of choice (as
causality) has the same psychological effect as actuality of choice. A government will ultimately
always claim God as its justiÞcation for existence, even as it disobeys at every turn and by its
deÞnition of law that moral Law of GodÕs Nature. Again, this is a perfect example of why no man
may claim two masters, or more speciÞcally two opposing sets of law to follow at the same time.

Here, in this choice of Law, lies what is called morality. Without it, choice means nothing. Evil will
always present itself as good, just as these legal “devilmasters” will always present themselves as
beneÞcial to man, when all they can really do is to add vice (give legal council) to manÕs Þctional
persona. Good and evil, as Nature and artiÞce, should never be artfully mixed. Like oil and water,
they cannot be enjoined unless they are forced together.


!805
 —=—

“It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains.”
—Patrick Henry

—=—

Positive law allows, through legality and special license, the act of crime to go unpunished. And it
is most often government and its agents that commit these legalized crimes. For the crime is not
considered in its action (verb) or essence in and against Nature, but only by the Þctional words that
describe the legal (permissible) and strictly deÞned crime in persona against only the false nature
(technology/art) of the Þction. If the crime can be described in a way that is in harmony with legal
law, despite its complete attack on the moral, unwritten Law, the legal magistrate “devilmasters”
may forgive the name and title (noun) of the crime while its victim still suffers the Reality (verb) of
it.

Legal law is established to control unlearned men who cannot govern their own actions, who are
not responsible for the well-being of other men and the Natural world as the very essence and
purposeful result of their own lifestyle and actions thereof, and for those who seek to gain from
other menÕs labor. But those men who would govern under this artiÞcial system never attempt to
teach their pledges how to self-govern ourselves, for that would signal the loss of respect and
authority that allows them such unnatural, “super-human” power over ignorant men. A devious
magician never reveals that which would uncover his illusion and expose his artful designs of
deceit.

Citizenship is by invitation only. It is purely voluntary. And only fools become public United States
citizens under that legal law, Þrst through the implanted and purposefully engrained ignorance of
our parents at the birth-delivery process, and then through our voluntary acceptation of the legal
realm as a false-reality, accepting all beneÞts and obligations of that citizenship through conÞrmed
use of the legal signature. The legal realm exists as a debtor’s hell on Earth because most men
cannot attain the keys to heaven on Earth by Living in Truth (Jehovah) and controlling their own
actions under Its Law. That is to say that man has lost the ability to use God to destroy the artiÞce
by scriptural instruction and under-standing. In the end, either under God or mammon, there is
only one maxim of law that matters; only one principle that deÞnes manÕs disposition and
establishes his law. For whatever law man chooses to follow, be it God or mammon, this one
requirement as a foundation is always the same…

—=—

“OBEDIENCE is the essence of the law.”

Obedientia est legis essentia. 11 Coke, 100 (Black4)

—=—

Think you know what obedience Really is?

Think you should learn what your magistrates say it is instead of falling prey to the dog-Latin
taught to you as their pets? Let’s face it… only when we were taught that obedience to the church
and state is equal to obedience to God did things really go to shit.

Don’t be vulgarly offended by this word shit, for words cannot harm you unless you either let them
or don’t understand them. The word shit comes from the noun (name) shyster, which has the
meaning of "UNSCRUPULOUS LAWYERÓ from the 1800s, being a US slang word and probably
altered from German Scheisser "incompetent worthless PERSON," from Scheisse “shit," from Old
High German skizzan "to defecate.”

!806
To describe a lawyer or attorney as “unscrupulous” is of course like describing water as “wet.” It’s
an obvious redundancy. For make no mistake about it, every attorney is required at bar, as agents
of the court, to be obedient to the law of man. There is no honesty or integrity in Þction. To this end,
my friends, there is no “good” attorney. They’re agents of the legal matrix, existing only as part of
its legal code as its pretended, entitled Þctions of law. Never be fooled that they can be anything
else, despite their charms or feigned religious de-nominations. To operate in the agency of govern-
ment one cannot go against government or its law. They have no choice. It’s practice or quit!
Attorneys are little shits, and there’s just no getting around that. But the problem is, another word
for agent is attorney. So we are all worthy of this title, not as an insult, but as a fact of our false
existence as agents for the Þctions of law (persons) of government and the law we follow. When you
take the mystery out of words they can no longer harm or offend you, for the Truth they may or
may not represent comes shining through to reveal our own dispositions in that netherworld of
evil. We may embrace the Truth or go on pretending to be offended by it. Either way, a citizenship
is an agent of (belonging to) the state, not of Jehovah.

Whatever manÕs individual choice, he must become and remain obedient to the creator of that
choice, be it to God’s Law over men or to government’s law over persons, for to act in person is to
be obedient to man’s legal law over that of God’s Design. Man may only have one master, and
therefore one law, for both adversarial laws cannot Exist in one place at the same time. Time is
meaningless in timelessness, while value is worthless in pricelessness. Opposites do not attract in
the case of law, and man cannot follow the scriptures while acting as a Þctional person (without
Self-Love), as personhood is outlawed by Nature just as Nature is outlawed by legal
considerations.

OBEDIENCE - Compliance with a command, prohibition, or known law and rule of duty
prescribed; THE PERFORMANCE OF WHAT IS REQUIRED OR ENJOINED BY
AUTHORITY, OR THE ABSTAINING FROM WHAT IS PROHIBITED, in compliance with
the command or prohibition. (Black4)

OBEDIENTIA - An OFFICE, or the ADMINISTRATION of it; a kind of RENT;

SUBMISSION; obedience. (Black4)

OBERATUS - Latin. In Roman law, A DEBTOR WHO WAS OBLIGED TO SERVE HIS
CREDITOR TILL HIS DEBT WAS DISCHARGED. (Black4)

PROHIBIT - To forbid by law; TO PREVENT; not synonymous with “regulate.” (Black4)

PROHIBIT - verb transitive - [Latin prohibeo; pro and habeo, TO HOLD.] 1. To forbid; to
interdict by authority; APPLICABLE TO PERSONS OR THINGS, but implying authority or
right. God prohibited Adam to eat of the fruit of a certain tree. THE MORAL LAW
PROHIBITS WHAT IS WRONG AND COMMANDS WHAT IS RIGHT. We prohibit a
person to do a thing, and we prohibit the thing to be done. 2. To hinder; TO DEBAR; to
prevent; to preclude. (Webs1828)

PROHIBITION - noun - [Latin prohibitio.] 1. The act of forbidding or interdicting; A

DECLARATION TO HINDER SOME ACTION; interdict. THE LAW OF GOD IN THE TEN
COMMANDMENTS CONSISTS MOSTLY OF PROHIBITIONS; ‘thou shalt NOT do such a
thing.’ 2. In law, a writ of prohibition is a writ issuing from a superior tribunal, directed to the
judges of an inferior court, commanding them to cease from the prosecution of a suit. By
ellipsis, prohibition is used for the writ itself. (Webs1828)

PROHIBITION - Inhibition; interdiction… The term prohibition is ALSO applied to the

interdiction of making, possessing, selling or giving away, intoxicating liquors, either
absolutely, or for beverage purposes, or for other than medicinal, scientiÞc, and
SACRAMENTAL PURPOSES. (Black4)

!807
 HABIT - noun - [Latin habitus, from habeo, to have TO HOLD. See Have.] 1. Garb; dress;
clothes or garments in general. The scenes are old, the habits are the same. We wore last year.
There are among the statues, several of Venus, in different habits. 2. A coat worn by ladies over
other garments. 3. STATE OF ANY THING; implying some CONTINUANCE or
PERMANENCE; temperament or particular state of a BODY, formed by nature OR
INDUCED BY EXTRANEOUS CIRCUMSTANCES; as a costive or lax habit of body; a
sanguine habit. 4. A DISPOSITION OR CONDITION OF THE MIND OR BODY
ACQUIRED BY CUSTOM or a frequent repetition of the same act. Habit is that which is
held or retained, the effect of custom or frequent repetition. Hence we speak of good habits
and bad habits. Frequent drinking of spirits leads to a habit of intemperance. We should
endeavor to correct evil habits BY A CHANGE OF PRACTICE. A great point in the
education of children, is to prevent the formation of bad habits. Habit of plants, THE
GENERAL FORM OR APPEARANCE, or the conformity of plants of the same kind in
structure and growth. - verb transitive - To dress; TO CLOTHE; to array. They habited
themselves like RURAL DEITIES. TO DWELL; TO INHABIT. (Webs1828)

—=—

To put it simply, God forbids and prohibits mammon and legal law, while legal law forbids and
prohibits God and moral Law. It’s classic Good vs. evil; God vs. satan (adversary). Habit and
custom are often used to justify the worst kind of devilry and evils against God (Jehovah) and man.

Is not the public education system speciÞcally designed to teach children the bad habits and
customs of the nation? Is not the purpose of public school to keep children thinking and acting in a
public (commercial) capacity? Isn’t public school just citizenship training? Does it not teach and
cause public-mindedness and conformity to the terms of art based on dog-Latin? And have you
ever really considered why the Bible is banned from most public schools?

Let us seek the words of Noah Webster as to these questions; to discover the purpose of his
dictionary designed to teach Scriptural Law and legal law side-by-side, a mutual intent of this very
same work.

—=—

“Every civil government is based upon some religion or philosophy of life.

Education in a nation will propagate the religion of that nation. IN
AMERICA, THE FOUNDATIONAL RELIGION WAS CHRISTIANITY.
And it was sown in the hearts of Americans through the HOME and
PRIVATE and PUBLIC schools for centuries. Our liberty, growth, and
prosperity was the result of a Biblical philosophy of life. OUR
CONTINUED FREEDOM AND SUCCESS IS DEPENDENT ON OUR
EDUCATING THE YOUTH OF AMERICA IN THE PRINCIPLES OF
CHRISTIANITY.”

“The heart should be cultivated with more assiduity than the head.”

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are
in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot
enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people
are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that
can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.”

!808
“The moral principles and precepts contained in the Scripture OUGHT TO
FORM THE BASIS OF ALL OUR CIVIL CONSTITUTIONS AND LAWS.”

“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the
Þrst things in which ALL CHILDREN, UNDER A FREE
GOVERNMENT, OUGHT TO BE INSTRUCTED… No truth is more
evident to my mind than THAT THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION MUST
BE THE BASIS OF ANY GOVERNMENT INTENDED TO SECURE
THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF A FREE PEOPLE.”

“A PURE DEMOCRACY IS GENERALLY A VERY BAD

GOVERNMENT. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth;
FOR A MULTITUDE IS OFTEN RASH, AND WILL NOT HEAR
REASON.”

“Every child in America should be acquainted with his own country. He

should read books that furnish him with ideas that will be useful to
him in life and practice. As soon as he opens his lips, he should rehearse
the history of his own country.”

“The education of youth should be watched with the most scrupulous

attention. [I]t is much easier to introduce and establish an effectual
system… than to correct by penal statutes the ill effects of a bad
system… THE EDUCATION OF YOUTH… LAYS THE
FOUNDATIONS ON WHICH BOTH LAW AND GOSPEL REST FOR
SUCCESS.”
–All above, separate quotes by Noah Webster

—=—

Have you Þgured out why a judge wears a black moo-moo?

They are clothing themselves in the symbol of the artiÞce of legal title. Black is the color of the evil
of empty authority. A judge wears a ÒhabitÓ to pre-tend that authority over man due to his formal
appearance as a legal, Þctional persona under color of title. The habit of the judge signiÞes an
administrative disposition as over-Lord of the legal realm. He that legally (artiÞcially) appears
before the judge in person suffers the wrath of that Þctional (evil) act.

This action allows the judge to pretend to be above the Natural, moral Law. It allows the purpose of
Law to be twisted from its scriptural principles and foundation, allowing man to be considered
without the foundational (e.g., constitutional, blood) considerations of that law, and instead be
viewed and considered only within the law of persons; as mere animals (without soul).

!809
 —=—

“Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government ofÞcials

shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the
citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be
imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our Government is
the potent, the omnipresent teacher. FOR GOOD OR FOR ILL, IT
TEACHES THE WHOLE PEOPLE BY ITS EXAMPLE. CRIME IS
CONTAGIOUS. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds
contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; IT
INVITES ANARCHY. To declare that, in the administration of the
criminal law, the end justiÞes the means -- to declare that the
GOVERNMENT MAY COMMIT CRIMES IN ORDER TO SECURE
THE CONVICTION OF A PRIVATE CRIMINAL -- would bring terrible
retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this Court should
resolutely set its face.”
—See Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 471-485 (1928)

—=—

To get around this, the private People created the public (commercial) realm of legal Þction. The
private People cannot be secured by the legal falsities of that public commercial law, whereas the
public people (goyim) are purely the victims of its contracted strictness.

Sadly, this conclusion has already manifested itself in the last 87 years. The once private man is
now largely become public. The government commits crime as its daily functionality, and the
courts support the licensed fraud even while claiming God as master. The contagion of citizenship
has allowed government ofÞcials and corporate heads to be immune from the rules of conduct of
the citizenry, for the law of persons is not the same as that private, Higher Law of God. We have a
government of approved, permitted anarchy.

A man that follows only GodÕs Law (Son) needs no prohibitions or interdictions from other men. A
man of God will never habitually fall victim to the ceremonies, customs, and culture of a factitious
society of legal, public personas.

FACTITIOUS - adjective - [Latin factitius, from facio.] MADE BY ART, in distinction from
what is produced by nature; ARTIFICIAL; as factitious cinnabar; factitious stones; factitious
air. (Webs1828)

LONG ROBE - A metaphorical expression designating the PRACTICE OF PROFESSION of

the law; as, in the phrase "gentlemen of the long robe.Ó (Black4)

ERMINE - By metonymy, this term is used to describe the ofÞce or functions of a Judge,
whose state ROBE, lined with ermine, IS EMBLEMATICAL OF PURITY AND HONOR
WITHOUT STAIN. (Black4)

ROBE - Fr. A word anciently used by sailors for the cargo of a SHIP. The Italian "roba" had
the same meaning. (Black4)

!810
 ROB - To take personalty in possession of another FROM HIS PERSON or his presence,
feloniously and against his will, by violence or BY PUTTING HIM IN FEAR. (Black4)

ROBBER - One who commits a robbery. The term is not in law synonymous with "thief," but
applies only to one who steals with force or open violence. (Black4)

ROBBERY - Felonious taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his
person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of FORCE OR
FEAR… (Black4)

—=—

Stealing personal property from the person…

Is this really a legal crime if a judge does so through legal means under the pretended unstained
purity and honor of his robe? After all, the property belongs to the person, the person belongs to
the government, and the judge only administrates state property. So how can an agent of govern-
ment steal from itself?

When is robbery not robbery?

All it takes is a little factitious consideration and it all makes a perfect, sinister sense. But it only
makes sense where non-sense is legally protected against sense, and where a piece of cloth and
ermine-lined robes can be believed to cause men to be the purest of gods in their pretended
magistracy. To this end, what is the difference between a priest and a judge? Nothing at all… Both
are merely judges employed to preach their own doctrine and sometimes pretend to forgive sins
behind ceremonial cloth and masonic symbols of false authority, while intentionally, knowingly
ignoring God’s Word.

Positive law is not in any way moral law, for the moral law is but a negative duty and not
originated by manÕs law. A positive law reßects not the Laws of Nature, and is only ever a creation
of man. It is a law imposed not over man but over his alter-ego, the cult of HU-manity in person-
hood. Humans are always non compos mentis, considered as mere animals (without soul) that must
be governed with authoritarian legality; as with any multitude (herd) of chattel. Humans are not
reasonable or negatively responsible under GodÕs Law, for the hu-man is some thing or part of or
about man, but not man as a whole Being. Only the substance of a man of God may be
distinguished from the legal form of humanity. Form is imagination and thus opposed to God, for
the full substance (mind, body, and soul) of God’s Creation is purposefully missing when man is
considered in merely a positive, hu-man form. Hu = the color (form) of man with no substance.

Perhaps the most important foundational fallacy of the transliterated Bible story is that Adam was
the Þrst individual man in and of Nature (Jehovah). This is a lie told by corporate religious
doctrines. The Bible is the story of manÕs fall into Þctional names, titles, and ethnicities as sin, where
man alone is not considered except as part of the whole (as commune-ism). Thus the word Adam is
a reference not to an individual man, but to humanity as a legal form and species. The portrayal of
the man in the Garden of Eden is what is known as personiÞcation, the ancient style of writing that
tells the story of a state of being of all men as an individual anthropomorphism in story (allegory)
format. The incorporated church wishes the followers of its false doctrines to take literally as
history (his story) what is intended purely as a Þgurative, allegorical, moral lesson as oneÕs Law
(Son). For the churches of the state do not wish for individual men to comprehend that it is our
own body alone that is the temple of God, and that their artfully constructed, 501(c) legalized
churches are not of GodÕs Realm, not acting under GodÕs Law, being but legal creations of manÕs
domain.

In short, the church and state wishes to turn men into hu-mans — into the adamic model of the
fallen man. Form with no substance. The despoiled seed of Adam’s fall.

!811
HUMAN - adjective - [Latin humanus; Hebrew. FORM, species.] 1. BELONGING TO MAN
OR MANKIND; pertaining or RELATING TO the race of man; as a human voice; human
shape; human nature; human knowledge; human life. 2. Having the QUALITIES of a man.
3. PROFANE; NOT SACRED OR DIVINE; as a human author. (Webs1828)

ADAM - noun - In Hebrew, Man; primarily, THE NAME OF THE HUMAN SPECIES,
MANKIND; appropriately, the Þrst Man, the progenitor of the HUMAN RACE. The word
signiÞes FORM, SHAPE, or suitable form, hence, SPECIES. It is evidently connected with
Hebrew, TO BE LIKE OR EQUAL, TO FORM AN IMAGE, TO ASSIMILATE. Whence the
sense of likeness, IMAGE, FORM, shape; Gr., a body, like. [See Man.]É (Webs1828)

ADAMIC - adjective - Pertaining to Adam. Adamic earth, is the term given to common red
clay, so called by means of A MISTAKEN OPINION THAT ADAM MEANS RED EARTH.
(Webs1828)

MAN - noun - plural men. [Hebrew species, kind, IMAGE, SIMILITUDE.] 1. Mankind; THE
HUMAN RACE; the whole species of human beings; BEINGS DISTINGUISHED FROM
ALL OTHER ANIMALS BY THE POWERS OF REASON AND SPEECH, as well as by their
shape and digniÞed aspect. 'Os homini sublime dedit.’ And God said, Let US make man in
OUR image, after OUR likeness, and let THEM have dominion--Genesis 1:26. Man that is
born of a woman, is of few days and full of trouble. Job 14:1. My spirit shall not always strive
with man. Genesis 6:3. I will destroy man whom I have created. Genesis 6:7. There hath no
temptation taken you, but such as is common to man. 1 Corinthians 10:13. It is written, man
shall not live by bread alone. Matthew 4:4. There must be somewhere such a rank as man,
Respecting man whatever wrong we call— But vindicate the ways of God to man. The proper
study of mankind is man. In the System of Nature, man is ranked as a distinct genus. When
opposed to woman, man sometimes denotes the male sex in general. Woman has, in general,
much stronger propensity than man to the discharge of parental duties. 2. A male individual
of the human race, of ADULT growth or years. THE KING IS BUT A MAN AS I AM. And
the man dreams but what the boy believed. 3. A male of the human race; used often in
COMPOUND WORDS, or in the nature of an adjective; as a man-child; men-cooks; men-
servants. 4. A SERVANT, or an attendant of the male sex. I and my man will presently go
ride. 5. A word of familiar address. We speak no treason, man. 6. It sometimes bears the sense
of A MALE ADULT of some uncommon qualiÞcations; particularly, the sense of strength,
vigor, bravery, virile powers, or magnanimity, as distinguished from the weakness, timidity
or impotence of a boy, OR FROM THE NARROW MINDEDNESS OF LOW BRED MEN. I
dare do all that may become a man. Will reckons he should not have been the man he is, had
he not broke windows— So in popular language, it is said, he is no man. Play your part like a
man. He has not the SPIRIT of a man. Thou art but a youth, and he a man of war from his
youth. 1 Samuel 17:8. 7. AN INDIVIDUAL OF THE HUMAN SPECIES. IN MATTERS OF
EQUITY BETWEEN MAN AND MAN — UNDER THIS PHRASEOLOGY, FEMALES MAY
BE COMPREHENDED. So a law restraining man or every man from a particular act,
COMPREHENDS WOMEN AND CHILDREN, IF OF COMPETENT AGE TO BE THE
SUBJECTS OF LAW. 8. Man is sometimes OPPOSED TO BOY OR CHILD, AND
SOMETIMES TO BEAST. 9. ONE WHO IS MASTER OF HIS MENTAL POWERS, OR
WHO CONDUCTS HIMSELF WITH HIS USUAL JUDGMENT. When a PERSON has lost
his senses, or acts without his usual judgment, we say, HE IS NOT HIS OWN MAN. 10. It is
sometimes used indeÞnitely, without reference to a particular individual; ANY PERSON;
ONE. This is as much as a man can desire. A man in an instant, may discover the assertion to
be impossible. This word however is always used in the singular number, referring to an
individual. In this respect it does not answer to the French on, nor to the use of man by our
Saxon ancestors. In Saxon, man of sloh, signiÞes, they slew; man sette ut, they set or Þtted out.
So in German, man sagt, may be rendered, one ways, it is said, they say, or people say. So in
Danish, man siger, one says, it is said, they say. 11. In popular usage, a husband. Every wife
ought to answer for her man. 12. A MOVABLE PIECE AT CHESS or draughts. 13. IN
FEUDAL LAW, A VASSAL, A LIEGE SUBJECT OR TENANT. The vassal or tenant, kneeling,

!812
 ungirt, uncovered and holding up his hands between those of his lord, professed that he did
become his man from that day forth, of life, limb, and earthly honor. Man of war, a ship or
war; an armed ship. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is difÞcult to pin down the proper usage of words to their proper art form, especially when most
men are ignorant of what art is according to its strange, Þctional existence. The word “man” can be a
reference to God’s Creation or to a slave of another of God’s Creation called as the name of a
person in title. Legally speaking, the artful form or hue of man is not as important as the word
private, whereas a public man implies personhood and subjection to government, and where a
private man does not, through the allegiance of private men to each other under the conjuration of
an oath is what makes a State (People). Remember, words portrayed in legalese are only ever of
form and status. So the word man must be used carefully. The word human, however, is always
form without substance, referring solely to the animal habits and characteristics of man, not the
higher or regenerate soul. Human laws are laws that belong to man, and are not of Nature. What is
“human” belongs only to man, not to God.

For clarity, letÕs deÞne terms in a way that shows the devolution of man into Þction (the Biblical
story), where the mere representation of man into the form of something false and hu-man steals
away his substance. The word human is used speciÞcally to describe man scientiÞcally (without
spirit, without Life) as something other than a creation of God in Nature, as the shadow of his
actual internal being.

The word “human” (monster) may certainly be a description of the form of man, or something be-
longing to man, but is never man in his private capacity within his own mind, body, and soul. This
word human is not a term of Nature, meaning itÕs not deÞned as a Creation of Nature. God Created
the True substance of man, not hu-mans. God is not the creator of words. Most importantly to law,
anything hu-man is of man or made and thus belonging to (property of) man. This is not a
referential to God as Creator, but to man in his artful sciences and general appearances.

Mankind is also not man, but a reference to the whole of a species. Mankind (Adam) is not one man,
for the True substance of man can only be one soul in Nature and under God. No man is a plurality.
When species is applied to any creation, the substance of the individual is lost in the legal science
of consideration of a class structure. These are the underpinnings of principles (maxims) of law.

In other words, human is only the form of man with no substance. And the societies that have
formed around that false form of man have been manipulated and led to what we know today as
the legal world, with emphasis not on the ambiguous substance of Reality but on the insubstantial
form of property (words).

HUMANITARIAN - A philanthropist; an anti-Trinitarian who rejects the doctrine of

Christ’s divinity; a perfectionist. (Colliers New Dictionary of the English Language, 1928)

HUMANITARIANISM - The doctrine that HUMANKIND may become perfect without

divine aid. (Webster’s New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, page 657)

HUMANISM - Any system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values
and dignity predominate, especially an ethical theory that OFTEN REJECTS THE
IMPORTANCE OF A BELIEF IN GOD. (Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 1990)

SECULAR HUMANISM - The philosophy or life stance of secular humanism (alternatively

known by some adherents as Humanism, speciÞcally with a capital H to distinguish it from
other forms of humanism) embraces HUMAN REASON, ethics, social justice and
philosophical naturalism, WHILE SPECIFICALLY REJECTING RELIGIOUS DOGMA, 




!813
super-naturalism, pseudoscience or superstition AS THE BASIS OF MORALITY AND
DECISION MAKING. (Wikipedia entry - 1. Council for Secular Humanism. "10 Myths About
Secular Humanism". 2. Edwards, Fred (1989). "What Is Humanism?" American Humanist
Association… etc. 3. Compact Oxford English dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2007. 4. Institute
for Humanist Studies.).

HUMAN - …3. BELONGING OR RELATIVE TO MAN AS DISTINGUISHED FROM GOD

OR SUPERHUMAN BEINGS; pertaining to the sphere or faculties of man (with implication
of LIMITATION OR INFERIORITY); MUNDANE; SECULAR. (Often opposed to divine.).
(Oxford New English Dictionary of 1901).

NATURALISM - A system of morality or religion having a purely natural basis; a view of

the world, and of man’s relationship to it, in which only the operation of natural, AS
OPPOSED TO SUPERNATURAL OR SPIRITUAL, LAWS AND FORCES IS ASSUMED.’
and ÔnaturalistÕ is deÞned as: ÔOne who follows the light of nature, AS CONTRASTED
WITH REVELATION. (The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, 1933)

HUMAN BEING - NATURAL MAN: UNENLIGHTENED OR UNREGENERATE. (Random

House Dictionary of the English Language, 2nd Edition)

HUMAN BEING - See MONSTER. (Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, 1930)

MONSTER - A HUMAN BEING by BIRTH, but in some part RESEMBLING A LOWER

ANIMAL. “A MONSTER… HATH NO INHERITABLE BLOOD, AND CANNOT BE HEIR
TO ANY LAND ALTHOUGH IT BE BROUGHT FORTH IN MARRIAGE…” (Ballentine’s
Law Dictionary, 1930)

MONSTROSITY - noun - The STATE OF BEING monstrous, or OUT OF THE COMMON

ORDER OF NATURE. We often read of monstrous births; but we see a greater
MONSTROSITY IN EDUCATION, WHEN A FATHER BEGETS A SON AND TRAINS
HIM UP INTO A BEAST. 1. AN UNNATURAL PRODUCTION; that which is monstrous.
Fabri arranges distortions, gibbosities, tumors, etc., in the class of morbiÞc monstrosities. A
MONSTROSITY NEVER CHANGES THE NAME OR AFFECTS THE IMMUTABILITY OF
A SPECIES. (Webs1828)

MONSTROUS - adjective - [Latin monstrosus.] UNNATURAL IN FORM; OUT OF THE

COMMON COURSE OF NATURE; as a monstrous BIRTH OR PRODUCTION. 1. Strange;
very wonderful; generally expressive of dislike. 2. Enormous; huge; extraordinary; as a
monstrous hight; a monstrous tree or mountain. 3. Shocking to the sight or other senses;
hateful. - adverb - Exceedingly; very much; as monstrous hard; monstrous thick. And will be
monstrous witty on the poor. [This use is colloquial and vulgar.] (Webs1828)

MONSTER - noun - [Latin monstrum, from monstro, TO SHOW. So we say in English, a sight.
See Muster.] 1. An ANIMAL produced with A SHAPE OR WITH PARTS THAT ARE NOT
NATURAL, as when the body is ill formed or distorted, or the limbs too few or too many, or
when any part is extravagantly out of proportion, either through defect or excess. 2. ANY
unnatural production; something greatly deformed. Monsters are common in the vegetable
kingdom. 3. A PERSON so wicked as to APPEAR horrible; one unnaturally wicked or
mischievous. SO A PARRICIDE IS CALLED A MONSTER. - verb transitive - To make
monstrous. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

PARRICIDE - noun - [Latin paricida, from pater, father, and coedo, to kill.] 1. A PERSON WHO
MURDERS HIS FATHER OR MOTHER. 2. ONE WHO MURDERS AN ANCESTOR, or any
one to whom he owes reverence. Blackstone applies the word to ONE WHO KILLS HIS
CHILD. 3. The murder of a parent or one to whom reverence is due. 4. One who INVADES
OR DESTROYS any to whom he owes particular reverence, AS HIS COUNTRY OR
PATRON. (Webs1828)

!814
 UNREGENERATE - Not regenerate; unrepentant; an unregenerate sinner; not convinced by
or unconverted to a particular religion; wicked, sinful, dissolute. (Random House Dictionary of
the English Language, 2nd Edition)

NATURAL PERSON - Natural person means HUMAN BEING, and not an artiÞcial or
juristic person. (Shawmut Bank, N.A. v. Valley Farms, 610 A. 2d. 652, 654; 222 Conn. 361)

NATURAL PERSON - ANY HUMAN BEING WHO AS SUCH IS A LEGAL ENTITY as

distinguished from an artiÞcial person, like a corporation, WHICH DERIVES ITS STATUS
AS A LEGAL ENTITY FROM BEING RECOGNIZED SO IN LAW. (Amon v. Moreschi, 296
N.Y. 395, 73 N.E.2d 716." Max Radin, Radin's Law Dictionary (1955), p. 216.)

NATURAL CHILD - The ordinary euphemism for ‘BASTARD’ or ILLEGITIMATE.” (Amon v.

Moreschi, 296 N.Y. 395, 73 N.E.2d 716.” Max Radin, Radin’s Law Dictionary (1955), p. 216)

NATURAL - AN IDIOT; one whom nature debars from understanding; A FOOL. (Samuel
Johnson’s Dictionary 1755)

—=—

We may certainly Þnd ample evidence of this distinction between the Real Nature and the artiÞcial
nature of the ranked man within the pen-named, artful literature and adversaria of days past,
especially when these corrupted men in their feigned nobility speak so vilely about the lower,
common class. Of course, such pretended ßatteries of title by blood nobility require above all else
the purposeful deceit and trickery of a generally induced public-mindedness upon the lower-class
to ensure such divisiveness and belief in (love of) that class structure. A slave must be made or
punished into believing he actually is a slave (noun). These nobles speak in contempt without any
interest in being the causal agents for the ÒregenerationÓ of their enslaved, ignorant cattle, any
more than a rancher seeks to enlighten and free the minds of his dumb, predictable, and proÞtable
cattle.

—=—

“The natural man has only two primal passions, to get and to beget.”
—William Osler

—=—

“THE NATURAL MAN IS A SPIRITUAL MONSTER. His heart is

where his feet should be, Þxed upon the earth; his heels are lifted up
against heaven, which his heart should be set on. His face is towards
hell; his back towards heaven. He loves what he should hate, and hates
what he should love; joys in what he ought to mourn for, and mourns
for what he ought to rejoice in; glories in his shame, and is ashamed of
his glory; abhors what he should desire, and desires what he should
abhor.”
—Thomas Boston, quoted from: ‘Augustus Toplady, Complete Works’

—=—

!815
 —=—

“Take the thoughts out of that narrow compass he has been all his life
conÞned to, you will Þnd him no more capable than a perfect natural.”
—John Locke

—=—

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for
they are foolishness unto him: NEITHER CAN HE KNOW THEM,
BECAUSE THEY ARE SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED.”
—1 Corinthians 2:14, KJB

—=—

“That a monster should be such a natural…”

—Shakespeare, from ‘Tempest’

—=—

And what does this word animal refer to, in the calling of man by such an epitaph? As discussed,
it’s different from what you might think. For to have animal life is to be a “natural” in corruption of
blood-right, to be out of the purview and protection of God and Nature, and to be subjected only to
the secular law of corrupt men. It is to be in motion without True knowledge, barred by the
mysteries of false gods. The animal is that which is animated without self-Love and spirit of
Source.

ANIMA - Latin. SOUL. (Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary, 3rd Edition)

ATE - The preterite of EAT, which see. - noun - a’ty. [Gr. MISCHIEF; TO HURT. Ate is A
PERSONIFICATION OF EVIL, mischief or MALICE.] In pagan mythology, the goddess of
mischief, who was cast down from heaven by Jupiter. (Webs1828)

ANIMATE - verb intransitive - [Latin amino. See ANIMAL.] 1. To give NATURAL LIFE to; to
quicken; TO MAKE ALIVE; as the soul animates the body. 2. To give POWERS to, or to
heighten the powers or effect of A THING; as, to animate a lyre (harp). 3. To give spirit or
vigor; to infuse courage, joy, or other enlivening passion; to stimulate or incite; as, to animate
dispirited troops. - adjective - Alive; POSSESSING ANIMAL LIFE. (Webs1828)

—=—

To legally anima-ate a person is Þguratively to eat the soul of a man, to personify man as evil
(artiÞce), as only an animal. To be animal is to act without soul, or at least to be considered legally
as without soul, without blood. For in law the mere fact of being alive is not enough; it is only
unregenerate animal life. Man must show the ability to reason in order to be distinguished from his
animal Nature. The legal form of the word “natural” means a fool without understanding, an idiot.
The legal Þction can never create anything of the essence (substance) of GodÕs actual Nature, and
can only instead diminish and rape Nature (Reality) down to mere word-form. And we must never
forget that words are never Truth. The legal word magicians had to redeÞne Nature into an evil
(live) consideration, a play on words, and then trick men into animating their Þctional creations in
artiÞce. Thus men are called by these word-smiths as ÒnaturalsÓ according to their opposing legal
deÞnition of nature, as unregenerate animals not having been born again into and under the
Natural Law of God’s Kingdom on earth. Bastards…

!816
Man is legally considered as “only hu-man” and therefore only to be considered legally as animal
(without soul) and thus illegitimate. An illegitimate cannot be heir to land. Thus the private People
are able to keep and be lords over all the land of the naturals.

It is of course a great fallacy and confusion to state that in Nature animals have souls just like man.
Think about that. It was very hard for an animal-lover like myself to comprehend the True meaning
and intent of these words legally without controlling my vulgar emotional considerations, as it will
likely be for the average reader. The notion of the “soul” as occurring in only man as a species is the
very basis of why men can and will be governed, be it under God or under man’s anti-God design.
For man is the only creature of reason capable of language arts; his soul thus set apart from the
animal world not because animals don’t have souls, but because man alone can distinguish be-
tween moral right and wrong and act accordingly. Man can lie to himself with ease and build entire
systems around those lies, whereas the animal kingdom cannot. This consideration as the “soul” of
man distinguishes man from the rest of the animal kingdom. This is only a legal consideration, for
most of man’s false intelligence and folly stems from the foolish understanding of his own in-
vented, unnatural information. Anti-Truth… Without this legal distinction and that notion of
misguided dialectic of fallacious logic (capacity for lies, as belief in legal Þctions), man would need
no law to govern him and would be purely animal in his Natural thought and functionality. His
artiÞce and designs simply cannot effect NatureÕs Design without organization into legal societies
under ethnicity of language and cultural habit. We must be tamed and trained to become that
which we are not in Nature to Þt into those adversarial societies (corporations), to be ruled by the
terms of art.

This, again, is merely the Þgurative comprehension of words. We must not let emotion lead our
minds when deÞning emotionless legal terms that apply to no living man or thing. In the Reality of
Nature, no rational man would ever consider that animals have no soul or no feelings. But in law,
this distinction is made for an important and distinct purpose. It is not put forth as an idea in
Reality, just in immoral legality, for man is certainly and uniquely capable of reason and false
dialectic (logic) to his own detriment and to that of all Nature Itself.

But again, when considering God (Jehovah) as Creation and as all of Nature Itself, it is not logical
or reasonable to consider that God (Existence) would allow Itself to be decimated and destroyed by
Its own Creation of man. God would certainly not give license to any man in his invention (re-
creation) to legally dissemble GodÕs Design and poison Its Life-giving properties.

The Bible tells us that man has the duty of Being protector of Nature and its Design in a spiritual
dominion and Law. It does not bestow any legal right to be the violent dominatrix and destroyer of
Nature and all Creatures within It on a whim, though the church and state promote such
mythology.

To be legally considered is to be considered without soul, as purely animal in Nature and actions,
with a veil of artiÞciality (legal status) draped or clothed over the man. Man as beast. It is not so
much the notion of being without soul, merely the notion of acting without spirituality or a Higher,
moral Law, an ability we attribute to the soul. An animal in Nature acts without spiritual
considerations in its animal functions of survival. Likewise, a man acting in the spiritually dead
domain of legalism acts just like those animals, driven by the artiÞcial instincts of an automaton
driven only to fulÞll his strict contractual requirements and monetary pursuits.

AN - The English indeÞnite article. Equivalent to "ONE" or "any"; seldom used to denote
plurality. (Black4)

ANIMA - (repeated) - Latin. SOUL. (Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary, 3rd Edition)

MAL, or MALE - As a preÞx, in composition, denotes ILL or VEIL, Latin malus. (Webs1828)

MAL - A preÞx meaning bad, wrong, FRAUDULENT; as maladministration, malpractice,

malversation, etc. (Black4)

!817
MALA - Latin. Bad; EVIL; wrongful. (Black4)

MALADY - noun - [Latin malum; Eng. mellow, Latin mollis.] 1. Any sickness or disease of the
human body; any distemper from impaired, defective or morbid organic functions; more
particularly, a lingering or deep seated disorder or indisposition. It may be applied to any
animal body, but is, I believe, rarely or never applied to plants. The maladies of the body may
prove medicines to the mind. 2. DEFECT OR CORRUPTION OF THE HEART; DEPRAVITY;
MORAL DISORDER OR CORRUPTION OF MORAL PRINCIPLES. Depravity of heart is a
moral malady. 3. DISORDER OF THE UNDERSTANDING OR MIND. (Webs1828)

ANIMAL - In law, ALL ANIMAL LIFE OTHER THAN MAN. An INFERIOR or

IRRATIONAL SENTIENT BEING, generally, though not necessarily possessed of the power
of locomotion. In etymology, comprehending ALL LIVING CREATURES, WHETHER
BRUTISH OR HUMAN. (Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary, 3rd Edition).

ANIMAL - Any ANIMATE being which is endowed with the power of VOLUNTARY
MOTION… (Black4)

ANIMAL - noun - [Latin animal from anima, air, BREATH, SOUL.] An organized body,
endowed with life and the power of VOLUNTARY motion; a living, sensitive, locomotive
body; as, MAN IS AN INTELLIGENT ANIMAL. Animals are essentially distinguished from
plants by the property of sensation. The contractile property of some plants, as the mimosa,
has the appearance of the effect of sensation, but it may be merely the effect of irritability. The
distinction here made between animals and vegetables, may not be philosophically accurate;
for we cannot perhaps ascertain the precise limit between the two kinds of beings, but this is
sufÞciently correct fOR COMMON PRACTICAL PURPOSES. The history of animals is
called zoology. BY WAY OF CONTEMPT, A DULL PERSON IS CALLED A STUPID
ANIMAL. - adjective - That belongs or relates to animals; as animal functions. ANIMAL IS
DISTINGUISHED FROM INTELLECTUAL; as animal appetites, the appetites of the body, as
hunger and thirst. The animal functions, are touch, taste, motion, etc. Animal life is opposed to
vegetable life. ANIMAL IS OPPOSED ALSO TO SPIRITUAL OR RATIONAL, WHICH
RESPECTS THE SOUL AND REASONING FACULTIES; as animal nature, spiritual nature,
rational nature. Animal food may signify that food which nourishes animals; but it usually
denotes food consisting of animal ßesh. Animal economy is THE SYSTEM OF LAWS BY
WHICH THE BODIES OF ANIMALS ARE GOVERNED and depending on their organic
structure. Animal spirit is a name given to the nervous ßuid. Animal spirits in the plural, life,
vigor, energy. ANIMAL SYSTEM, or animal kingdom denotes THE WHOLE CLASS OF
BEINGS ENDOWED WITH ANIMAL LIFE. (Webs1828)

TAME - Domesticated; accustomed to man; RECLAIMED FROM A NATURAL STATE of

wildness. In the Latin phrase, tame animals are described as dominae naturae. (Black4)

DOMITAE - Latin. Tame; domesticated; not wild. Applied to DOMESTIC ANIMALS, IN

WHICH A MAN MAY HAVE AN ABSOLUTE PROPERTY. (Black4)

DOMINATE - To MASTER, to RULE, or to CONTROL. (Black4)

DOMINATIO - In old English law. LORDSHIP. (Black4)

DOMINICAL - That which denotes THE LORD'S DAY, OR SUNDAY. (Black4)

DOMINICA PALMARUM - (Dominica in ramis palmarum.) L. Latin. Palm Sunday. (Black4)

DOMUS DEI - THE HOUSE OF GOD; a name applied to many HOSPITALS and
RELIGIOUS HOUSES. (Black4)

!818
 DOMINUS NAVIS - In the civil law. The OWNER of a VESSEL. (Black4)

—=—

As we can see here, the notion of being born again into Nature (God) does not refer to a state of
religious ignorance of scriptural teachings in a mere animal life alone; a ceremonial life (evil) spent
kneeling before false gods in false religious houses. Animals will always be tamed (domesticated)
and dominated by evil men, be they hu-man or any other beast carrying man’s burden of legality.
Most importantly we must reclaim our innocence, our child-like understanding of all things, with-
out the adultery, licenses, canonized indulgences, and conÞrmed lies of the artful re-creations of
men.

—=—


“At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the
greatest in the kingdom of heaven? And Jesus called a little child unto
him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you,
EXCEPT YE BE CONVERTED, AND BECOME AS LITTLE CHILDREN,
YE SHALL NOT ENTER INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.
WHOSOEVER THEREFORE SHALL HUMBLE HIMSELF AS THIS
LITTLE CHILD, THE SAME IS GREATEST IN THE KINGDOM OF
HEAVEN.”
—Matthew 18: 1-4, KJB

—=—

Here again we see nothing of the word heaven as some afterlife concept, but as the realm of God on
this Earth inhabited only by those not lost in the Þctions and lies of men, and who are instead
Living Purely in Nature and under Its Law.

This notion of being born again into heaven (the Purity of Nature) must be under-stood, not as the
ridiculousness parroted by corporate “Christians” who pray to and for mammon, but in the way it
was intended in the scriptures. For this mysterious notion of being “born again” is not at all
esoteric when translated correctly, and instead quite desirable and reasonable. It is the reward for
following the Law/Word/Son of Jehovah. ItÕs to Þnd and remain only in Truth. And yet so many of
us remain as publicly declared non-believers… somehow believing not in (hating) the Heavenly
Reality of Nature that sustains us, choosing delusion and Þction over Source, respecting the law of
names (nouns) over the self-Existent Law of Life (Being).

In fact, within the parabolic teachings of the Bible, we who pose such questions of mis-
understanding due to the church and entertainment industry’s false indoctrinations are not so
different from that Judaized character and story of Nicodemus, who could not fathom what it was
to be born anew while having already lived falsely for so many years already. The metaphor, as with
so many caught in literalism of dog-Latin today, was lost upon such a worldly, wealthy man. And
he whom is successful in mammon, after his prestigious education and climb up the Þctional
ladder of rankings and raises, seldom sees the “value” in starting over as if a child, nor that he
needs any such savior as the Word (Son/Law) of Jehovah. For his whole career subsists and shines
only thorough every broken law and commandment, through the lies of commercial values in
mammon. So much can be attained in Real Life from this one parable:

!819
 —=—

“There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the

Jews: The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we
know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these
miracles that thou doest, EXCEPT GOD BE WITH HIM. Jesus answered
and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, EXCEPT A MAN BE
BORN AGAIN, HE CANNOT SEE THE KINGDOM OF GOD.
Nicodemus saith unto him, HOW CAN A MAN BE BORN WHEN HE
IS OLD? can he enter the second time into his mother's WOMB, and be
born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, EXCEPT A MAN
BE BORN OF WATER AND OF THE SPIRIT, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God. THAT WHICH IS BORN OF THE FLESH IS FLESH;
AND THAT WHICH IS BORN OF THE SPIRIT IS SPIRIT. MARVEL
NOT THAT I SAID UNTO THEE, YE MUST BE BORN AGAIN. The
wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but
canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: SO IS EVERY
ONE THAT IS BORN OF THE SPIRIT. Nicodemus answered and said
unto him, How can these things be? …IF I HAVE TOLD YOU EARTHLY
THINGS, AND YE BELIEVE NOT, HOW SHALL YE BELIEVE, IF I
TELL YOU OF HEAVENLY THINGS?”
—John 3: 1-9, & 12, KJB

—=—

Oh the plight of the literalist, who cannot see the spiritual side of all things, who cannot trust in the
Source of that invisible Spirit behind the wind even as it pushes him over.

So what is the biggest difference between the True and Pius follower of the Word (Son) and the
citizenry of any of the gods of the nations? Simple… One is free to journey upon an unset course
with no beginning and no end under only GodÕs Law (as eternal, spiritual Life), and one is Þxed in
residency by a pre-determined course in commercial franchise (legal free-dom) and insurances of
artiÞcial monetary securities (mammon), acting in the agency of man and under his artiÞcial law
(without eternal Life, only evil). While the man may Live equally as long in both lives, his eternal
Life stems only from his not being registered in birth and death certiÞcation (the time domain, as
the beginning and end of false existence), and instead from Living only in the Spirit and innocence
of God’s Nature (Creation). Lands are only passed through the eternal Life-blood, to those children
untainted by the seizure of false existence under registered personhood, of that artiÞcial life (status)
that exists only in the time domain of a legal contract. Death, for the eternal man, is merely the
passing of the Life estate upon his kin. Whereas the certiÞed death of a public persona is the
dissolving of a corporate, Þctional entity without blood consideration. Strangely enough, this
means that to have Eternal Life, one must be spiritually Free to have only a Natural death. One
must die without legal name in districted capacity, for to die in Eternity one must have been reborn
under GodÕs Nature and Law. Jehovah is by deÞnition Eternity, and so too is man when
unblemished by worldly, secular things. For the untainted man is part of that Eternal Oneness of
the Whole Being of self-Existence. The ÒEternityÓ of Life scripturally spoken of is of course another
Þgurative description of the un-fallen man; as opposed to he that is induced by many temptations

!820
of the artiÞce to abandon his own Self-respect, Self-Love, and Self-Existence in the pursuit of
extraneous and unessential money and other artiÞces and adversarial, meaningless stuff. This is not
religious gobbledegook, but a very clear and parabolic narrative of the very separate moral
conditions and characters of man. Only the fool would spit upon this ultimate wisdom due to the
mistranslation of others who seek to destroy its original intent. But then only a fool would consider
and believe in (love) the non-Existence of Existence (Jehovah) and Its self-Evident Law. Only the
fool can be tricked into acting outside of his True Self, as property (person) of another, while at the
same time wholeheartedly believing in that false, legal existence as Reality.

And my God have we all been made the foolÉ

The soul of each man in spiritual Life must be governed by his own mind with Natural Reason and
knowledge, including the fear (respect) of God. ItÕs not enough to pretend to be Òborn againÓ
through some religious ceremony of rites conducted by a hireling preacher or other legalized
clergy-person under a false corporate church doctrine in some false Domus Dei built by the hands of
masonic men. This is a purposefully instilled, externally conditioned state of ignorance and care-
fully planned and institutionalized misunderstanding of the scriptural teachings. It is not the pomp
and ceremony but the Life Lived that either makes the man or reveals the animal. The church only
promotes legal things it may control. In Reality, a born again man would never continue in person-
hood and surety of citizenship knowing its intention against that of GodÕs very Nature and Law, as
this legal status can only exist upon the registered spiritual death of man, while man can only
commune with Nature on a spiritual level. The very support of the state by the church and vice
versa reveals all corporate religions to be false doctrines against GodÕs Law and scriptural
teachings. All corporate, registered state religions, in other words, are an artiÞcial matrix to hide the
Truth that is God.

CEREMONY - noun - 1. OUTWARD RITE; EXTERNAL FORM IN RELIGION. 2. Forms of

civility; RULES ESTABLISHED BY CUSTOM FOR REGULATING SOCIAL
INTERCOURSE. 3. Outward forms of STATE; THE FORMS PRESCRIBED OR
ESTABLISHED BY ORDER OR CUSTOM, serving for the purpose of CIVILITY OR
MAGNIFICENCE, as in levees of princes, the reception of ambassadors, etc. Master of
ceremonies, an ofÞcer who superintends the reception of ambassadors. A PERSON who
regulates the forms to be observed by the company or attendants on a PUBLIC occasion.
(Webs1828)

SACRAMENTARY - noun - 1. An ancient book of the Romish church, written by pope

Gelasius, and revised, corrected and abridged by St. Gregory, in which were contained ALL
THE PRAYERS AND CEREMONIES PRACTICED in the celebration of the sacraments. 2. A
sacramentarian; a term of reproach applied by papists to protestants. (Webs1828)

SACRAMENTARIAN - adjective - Pertaining to sacramentarians and to their controversy

respecting the eucharist. (Webs1828)

EUCHARIST - noun - [Gr. a giving of thanks; well, favor.] 1. The sacrament of the Lord's
supper; the solemn act or CEREMONY OF COMMEMORATING THE DEATH OF OUR
REDEEMER, in the use of bread and wine, as emblems of his ßesh and blood, accompanied
with appropriate prayers and hymns. 2. The act of giving thanks. (Webs1828)

SACRAMENTUM - Latin. Roman Law. AN OATH, as being a very sacred thing; more
particularly, the oath taken by soldiers TO BE TRUE TO THEIR GENERAL AND THEIR
COUNTRY. In one of the formal methods of beginning an action at law (legis actiones) known
to the early Roman jurisprudence, the sacramentum was A SUM OF MONEY deposited in
court by each of the litigating parties, as a kind of WAGER or forfeit, to abide the result of
the suit. The successful party received back his stake; the losing party forfeited his, and it was
paid into the public treasury, to be expended for sacred objects, (in sacris rebus), whence the
name. Roman LawÉ (In) common law. AN OATH. (Black4)

!821
 SACRAMENT - noun - [Latin sacramentum, AN OATH, from sacer, sacred.] 1. Among ancient
christian writers, A MYSTERY. [Not in use.] 2. An oath; a ceremony producing an
OBLIGATION; but not used in this general sense. 3. In present usage, an outward and visible
sign of inward and spiritual grace; or more particularly, A SOLEMN RELIGIOUS
CEREMONY enjoined by Christ, THE HEAD OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, to be
observed by his followers, by which their special relation to him is created, or their
obligations to him renewed and ratiÞed. THUS BAPTISM IS CALLED A SACRAMENT for
by it persons are separated from the world, brought into Christ's visible church, and laid
under particular obligations to obey his precepts. The eucharist or communion of the Lord's
supper, is also a sacrament for by commemorating the death and dying love of Christ,
christians avow their special relation to him, and renew their obligations to be faithful to
their divine Master. When we use sacrament without any qualifying word, we mean by it, 4.
The eucharist or Lord's supper. - verb transitive - TO BIND BY AN OATH. (Webs1828)

SACRAMENTUM FIDELITATIS - In old English law. THE OATH OF FEALTY. (Black4)

—=—

It should be noted that when these religions speak of Christ, as the stated head of the “Christian
Church,Ó itÕs reference is generally towards the vicar (replacement), the acting ofÞcer, the corp
oration sole; namely the pope, queen, or king, for the church of Jesus the Christos is only a Real
People, not a corporation of persons. Think of it this way, one cannot register “Jesus the christ” as
the president of a legal corporation, now can they. Trust me when I say that Jesus is nowhere to be
found as the head of any legalized, state-sanctioned, corporate church.

Jehovah requires no oath, only that you follow the Law without fault or derision. An oath is a
legally positive redundancy when one’s Life is already in celebration of Truth. Oaths need only be
taken to artiÞcial, sacred (cursed) things created by man, like an oath to the words of the
constitution (debt compact). Abeyance to the Law of Nature is Life Itself, a True action of the Purest
of Being, not a ceremony done every Sunday to a false christ standing Þctionally as a 501(c) 3 legal
Þgurehead. Oaths are only made to artiÞcial persons by natural persons, never by men, and never
to the Reality of God.

Let’s take a look at some of the sections of the Articles of Incorporation of the President of the
Mormon “church,” and see if anything at all can be said to be of scriptural purview or of the Law of
God’s Nature:

“Fourth: The TITLE of the PERSON making these articles of incorporation is “President of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.” He and his successor in ofÞce shall be deemed
and are hereby created a body politic and CORPORATION SOLE WITH PERPETUAL
SUCCESSION, having all the powers and rights and authority in these articles speciÞed or
provided for by law.”

“Second: The object of this corporation shall be to acquire, hold and dispose of such real and
personal property as may be conveyed to or acquired by said corporation for the beneÞt of the
members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, a religious society, for the beneÞt of
religion, for works of charity and FOR PUBLIC WORSHIP (UNDER AND PURSUANT TO
the provisions of Chapter 3, Title 19, of the Compiled Laws of Utah, 1917, on “Churches and
Religious Societies,” AND ALL ACTS AMENDATORY THEREOF AND SUPPLEMENTARY
THERETO…) Such real and personal property may be situated, either within the State of Utah,
or elsewhere, and this corporation shall have power, without any authority or authorization
from the members of said Church or religious society, to grant, sell, convey, rent, mortgage,
exchange, or otherwise dispose of any part of all of such property.”

—Separate Articles of Incorporation for LDS church president, amended in years 1923 and 1940

—=—

!822
By viewing these documents as exactly what they are, strictly legal documents for a strictly secular,
legalized ÒreligionÓ that is totally bound under the legal law of the Þctional Òstate,Ó we may
understand just why these corporations called churches have nothing of God’s Word (Son) within
them. And “public worship” is certainly against the scriptural teachings. The president of the
church is not a man, but a person, holding a corporate ofÞce very much like the ÒqueenÓ or Òpope,Ó
where successors to that false, ÒimmortalÓ ofÞce of continuously fraudulent, Þctional characters is
controlled by a Òboard of directorsÓ called as the churches Òquorum.Ó

And what does the IRS warn about such corporate tax shelters pretending to be as churches?

—=—

IRS Warns of “Corporation Sole” Tax Scam

“These corporate vehicles are used by individuals to get exemption from

federal income taxes as an organization described in Section 501(c)(3).”

ÒÔThis scheme shamelessly tries to take advantage of special tax beneÞts

available to legitimate religious groups and church leaders,’ said IRS
Commissioner Mark W. Everson. ‘Unscrupulous tax promoters always
look for ways to game the system and prey on unsuspecting victims.
Taxpayers should be on the look-out for these and other scams…’ The
IRS also warned that ‘the scam could be starting to spread with multiple
cases seen recently in states such as Utah and Washington.’”
—IRS publication, IR-2004-42, March 29, 2004

—=—

This system, this multi-billion dollar commercial hub of the LDS corporation (nicknamed as the
Vatican of Utah) is but a microcosm of the corporate United States itself, or that of any nation or
state as a pirate cove. The corporation is a body politic of speciÞc, higher in classÒpeopleÓ who are
in control of all the assets and holdings of the corporation (church), while the entirety of its
tributary (tithing) membership in the millions holds nothing thereof, having no actual interest in
the land and property holdings of that sole corporate persona in law, the “president.”

But the most important aspect here is that this corporation is not in any way a True church (people)
of Jehovah, and certainly not of christ. It does not in any way follow the Law of God, and even
created its own divinely channeled law as the Mormon “Doctrines and Covenants” in complete
disrespect and in spite of the Bible and based on glass scrying stones. I would state here that no
man in his right mind would join such a corporate body politic, which the Bible clearly shuns, but
then I must remind myself constantly that right-mindedness is a rare commodity in this world.

For more on this mystic history of the so-called Mormon prophet (president), among so many
accessible sources of SmithÕs unique and creative misinterpretations of scripture, read ÒScrying for
the Lord: Magic, Mysticism, and the Origins of the Book of Mormon,Ó by Clay L. Chandler.

Romans (pagans) in their universal (Catholic) church corporation celebrate the death of christ, not
the spiritual Life. The pope cannot claim to be in the ofÞce of Christ unless his followers accept that
christ is utterly dead, both literally, spiritually, and Þguratively. But a True follower of the teachings
of christ examines the Life (Light), not the death of christ, and certainly not the writings of such
false replacements (antichristos) claiming to be the ofÞce of Christ on Earth. The parabolic telling of

!823
the christ story as the “New Testament” (New Law) is delivered for every man to walk in His
footsteps, with man’s own body as the only temple upon that narrow path assigned to such
spiritual men. But the pope and other false gods seek to impersonate christ’s character and
reputation into an artiÞcial persona that can pretendedly captured and thus represented and
anthropomorphized within a legal, immortal ecclesiastical ofÞce of corporation soul, which can be
passed from man to man in perpetuity; a sick and twisted ceremonial re-creation of and tribute to
christ’s death and resurrection, which without, the vicar of christ may not therefore exist. It is only
the death of christ that gives the pope life.

But this is really just the ritualistic passing of the Babylonian Þsh-hat (mitre) of Dogan, the Þsh-god
of the Philistines and Babylonians. How easily we forget the Babylonian roots of the Romish
Church! For Rome, its empire and its ßattering titles, were born under the Old Law, the Old
Testament, and so must necessarily be antichrist (against the fulÞllment of the New Law towards
the Old).

—=—

“The miter is derived directly from the miters of the ancient pagan Þsh-
god Dagon and the goddess Cybele.  THE PAPAL MITER REPRESENTS
THE HEAD OF DAGON with an open mouth, which is the reason for
the pointed shape and split top.”
—Ruben Joseph, excerpted from: ‘Why Are The Young People Leaving The ChurchB ’

—=—

“In their veneration and worship of Dagon, the high priest of paganism
would actually put on a garment that had been created from a huge
Þsh… The head of the Þsh formed a mitre above that of the old man,
while its scaly, fan-like tail fell as a cloak behind, leaving the human
limbs and feet exposed.”
—Austen Henry Layard, excerpt from: ‘Nineveh and Babylon’

—=— 
 
“The most prominent form of worship IN BABYLON was dedicated to
Dagon, later known as Ichthys, or the Þsh. In Chaldean times, THE
HEAD OF THE CHURCH WAS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF DAGON,
he was considered to be INFALLIBLE, and was addressed as ‘YOUR
HOLINESS’. NATIONS SUBDUED BY BABYLON HAD TO KISS THE
RING AND SLIPPER OF THE BABYLONIAN GOD-KING. The same
powers and the same titles are claimed to this day by the Dalai Lama of
Buddhism, and the Pope. Moreover, the vestments of paganism, the Þsh
mitre and robes of the priests of Dagon ARE WORN BY THE
CATHOLIC BISHOPS, CARDINALS AND POPES. Ea Enki, who is a
God of Sumerian (Enki) and Babylonian (Ea) mythology… WAS A

!824
WATER GOD who was half man, half Þsh hybrid. In Greek mythology,
Ea was known as Oannes…It is believed that, in the daytime, this deity
would emerge from the water and WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR
TEACHING ART, SCIENCE AND WRITING TO THE HUMAN
RACE.”
—Mary E. Walsh, excerpt from: ‘Wine of Roman Babylon’

—=—

ÒAt Þrst they led a somewhat wretched existence and lived without rule
after the manner of beasts. But, in the Þrst year AFTER THE FLOOD
appeared an animal endowed with HUMAN REASON, named Oannes,
who rose from out of the Erythian Sea, at the point where it borders
Babylonia. He had the whole body of a Þsh, but above his Þsh's head he
had another head which was that of a man, and human feet emerged
from beneath his Þsh's tail. HE HAD A HUMAN VOICE, AND AN
IMAGE OF HIM IS PRESERVED UNTO THIS DAY. He passed the day
in the midst of men without taking food; he taught them the use of
LETTERS, SCIENCES AND ARTS OF ALL KINDS. He taught them to
construct CITIES, to found TEMPLES, to compile LAWS, and explained
to them the PRINCIPLES OF GEOMETRICAL KNOWLEDGE. He made
them distinguish the seeds of the earth, and showed them how to collect
the fruits; in short he instructed them in everything which could tend
TO SOFTEN HUMAN MANNERS AND HUMANIZE THEIR LAWS.
From that time nothing material has been added by way of
improvement to his instructions. And when the sun set, this being
Oannes, retired again into the sea, for he was amphibious.”
—Writings of Berossus, a 3rd century Babylonian priest

—=—

“The Masons hold their grand festival on the day of St. John, NOT
KNOWING that therein they merely signify the Þsh-god Oannes, the
Þrst Hermes and THE FIRST FOUNDER OF THE MYSTERIES, THE
FIRST MESSENGER TO WHOM THE APOCALYPSE WAS GIVEN,
and whom they ignorantly confound with the fabulous author of the
common Apocalypse. The sun is then (midsummer day) in its greatest
altitude. In this the Naros is commemorated.Ó
—‘Book of Enoch’ (vol. ii., p. 514), as quoted from: ‘Encyclopedia of Freemasonry and its Kindred Sciences,’ by Albert C. Mackey

—=—

!825
As the author has chosen to include no images within this work, it is recommended that the reader
search out this information in order to verify these strange Mysteries, so that they are no longer
hidden under the rose of religious ceremony and the ßattering, pampas, and extravagantly mis-
understood robes of that Þshy papal incorporation.

The scriptures tell us to take no other gods before the self-Existing and Permanent One, before that
of Jehovah. For to take a god requires an oath and fealty to that god and its false law. ItÕs this
requirement and need for a contractual, voluntary surety that is how we shall know that which is
false, for we are told to take no oaths, making only vows (promises) between ourselves and our
Nature (Creator), and thus being judged only ultimately by our Maker. This is the only True
Freedom, when Jehovah is the only True and recognized Sovereign, and we are again a Living part
of Its Nature and Law. In other words, True Freedom happens only when we stop acting
unnaturally, lying to ourselves, and pretending that we are some Þctional person or thing we are
not in a place that doesnÕt actually Exist.

In the scriptures, another word for oath is said to be a sacredly held curse. And we sign our con-
tracts in cursive (cursed) writing.

—=—

“An oath has in it three component parts, — truth, justice, and

judgment; TRUTH IN THE PARTY SWEARING; justice and judgment
IN THE JUDGE ADMINISTERING the oath.”
—Sacramentum habet in se tres comites,—veritatem, justitiam, et judicium; veritas habenda est in jurato; justitia et justicium in judice. 3 Inst. 160. (Black1)

—=—

“A FOOLISH OATH, though FALSE, makes not perjury.”

—Sacramentum si fatuum fuerit, licet falsum, tamen non committit perjurium. 2 Inst. 167. (Black1)

—=—

“…and love no false oath…”

—Zechariah 8:17, KJB

—=—

“OATHS ARE BUT WORDS, and words but wind.”

—Samuel Butler (1612-1680), Hudribas


—=—

The judge takes no oath to you, the fool. Only you must tell the legal brand of truth, not the judge.
The oath you take to whatever inanimate objectÕs name is invoked (e.g., ßag, constitution, etc.),
solidiÞes that Þction-of-law ÒjudgeÓ as magistrate (god), causing its opinion (conÞrmed lie) about
Þction and its law to become infallible truth.

Choice, in other words, be not foolish in the eyes of the law, for the law only lures fools to its false
ßames of justice. Man is free to take any oath, and even the Bible admits to this. But he is also
responsible for the consequences and bound by his foolish actions thereof. The Bible Law only 




!826
protects those who take no oaths to the artiÞce (false gods) in lieu of that Law of God and Nature,
for an oath has only the purpose of assigning allegiance to anything but Jehovah, so as to follow
anotherÕs law, which always, necessarily opposes GodÕs.

The Swiss Guard, for instance, as that small Vatican-based army that has guarded the ofÞce of
pope for over 500 years, swears an oath not to God but despite God, and sacraments only to protect
and obey these antichrist vicars in that successive, antichrist corporation sole. They must, of course,
be under the age of 30 to ensure that wondrous and so easily manipulative ignorance and foolish
bravery of youth, and naturally already brainwashed by the Catholic faith Ñ the Jesuit way.

Ñ=Ñ

“I swear I will faithfully, loyally, and honourably serve the Supreme

Pontiff Francis AND HIS LEGITIMATE SUCCESSORS, and also
dedicate myself to them with all my strength, sacriÞcing if necessary
also my life to defend them. I assume this same commitment with
regard to the Sacred College of Cardinals whenever the SEE is vacant.
Furthermore I promise to the Commanding Captain and my other
superiors, respect, Þdelity and obedience. This I swear! May God and
our Holy Patrons assist me!”



—Oath of the Swiss Guard to the Pope (to the perpetual Corporation of the Crown)

Ñ=Ñ

When the See of the water god is vacant due to the death of the man acting in the ofÞce of pope, the
board of directors or ÒSacred CollegeÓ takes over the corporation in the interim, and so the oath
must include that secular body politic until their vote for a new man-pope is revealed by a
ceremonial smoke signal.

God is always invoked in every oath, yet no oath is ever to Jehovah, only to the replacement gods
and magistrates of the artful world; the vicars. God needs no oaths from men, only duty to Its Law,
which of course tells us to take no such foolish oaths. But there is no oath to Jehovah at all in the
Bible, itÕs just a given, and even one of the Ten Commandments! One only need take an oath to that
which is false, for the oath requires the subject to act falsely in a fealty against his own Nature and
God (Law). A Life Lived in Nature and by Its Laws would not be furthered by any oath in any way.
Jehovah respects no oath any more than the false Nature of the oath keeper or the artiÞce to which
that oath is taken, for an oath is always, without exception opposed to GodÕs Nature and Law. An
oath can only ever take man away from God (Reality) and into Þction, and it can only ever be in
respect of the ßag, seal, and other symbolic idolatry of false gods. An oath also falls under the
doctrine of master and servant, as an act of volunteerism. No oath is ever forced upon any man, for
such involuntary force equates to legal illegitimacy. It is always a choice, generally accompanied by
a unilateral contract with the devils that created that oath. This fact is generally stated as part of the
written oath, as, I take this oath freely, in good conscious, and without coercion…

Man is considered as mere animal (without soul) while he animates a non-spiritual, Þctional
persona and its ßattering titles, which in its national (birthed) form requires the abandonment of
GodÕs Law and any substance of Nature through an oath of allegiance. The man is no longer
considered as Living, only as a dead pledge. To be Truly Alive is to be born again into the purity of
Nature, which only means to come back into the full Supremacy of Permanent Being of Jehovah
with absolutely no respect to persons or other artiÞces, including those personages of the church
and state and their false promises (vows) via legal oath. To be born again is only to revert to our
Original state of Being in Nature. But being merely alive is not enough, for any low animal is alive.

!827
Reason must accompany the man in his spiritually Alive endeavors. The Highest Moral, Natural
Law must guide his choices and defeat any adversarial causalities and stumbling blocks thrown in
his narrow Path. A man alive but without reason and knowledge will surely be governed by other
men who seek to make him contractually a legally dead animal — a beast of burden.

—=—

ALIVE - adjective - 1. Having life, IN OPPOSITION TO DEAD; living; being in a state in

which the organs perform their functions, and the ßuids move, whether in animals or
vegetables; as, the man or plant is alive. 2. In a state of action; unextinguished; undestroyed;
unexpired; in force or OPERATION; as, keep the process alive. 3. Cheerful; sprightly; lively;
full of alacrity; as, the company were all alive. 4. SUSCEPTIBLE; EASILY IMPRESSED;
having lively feelings, AS WHEN THE MIND IS SOLICITOUS ABOUT SOME EVENT; as,
one is alive to whatever is interesting to a friend. 5. Exhibiting motion or moving bodies in
great numbers. The city was all alive when the General entered. 6. IN A SCRIPTURAL
SENSE, REGENERATED; BORN AGAIN. For this MY SON WAS DEAD AND IS ALIVE.
Luke 15:24. [This adjective always follows the noun which it qualiÞes.] (Webs1828)

REGENERATE - verb transitive - [Latin regenero; re and genero. See Generate.] 1. To generate or
produce anew; to reproduce. Through all the soil a genial ferment spreads, regenerates the
plants and new adorns the meads. 2. In theology, TO RENEW THE HEART BY A CHANGE
OF AFFECTIONS; TO CHANGE THE HEART AND AFFECTIONS FROM NATURAL
ENMITY TO THE LOVE OF GOD; to implant holy affections in the heart. - adjective -[Latin
regeneratus.] 1. Reproduced. 2. BORN ANEW; RENOVATED IN HEART; CHANGED FROM
A NATURAL TO A SPIRITUAL STATE. (Webs1828)

—=—

But what is the essence of the regenerate man, as compared to the spiritually dead character of
humanity? Can a man actually be a human (Adam), or is this just another trick of magical spellings
of the false gods (re-creators)?

CREATURE OF REASON – MAN. (Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary, 3rd Edition - Slate v Jones, 1
Miss (Walk) 83, 85.).

HUMAN – Of the FORM and CHARACTERISTICS of man. (Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary, 3rd
Edition)

ESSENCE – The gist or SUBSTANCE of anything. The VITAL constituent of a thing.

(Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary 3rd Edition).

SUBSTANCE – ESSENTIALS. THE ANTITHESIS OF “FORM”. (Ballentine’s Legal Dictionary,

3rd Edition - State v Japone, 202 IOWA 450, 455, 209 NW 468, 71.)

FORM – 6. The external APPEARANCE WITHOUT THE ESSENTIAL QUALITIES. (Samuel

Johnson’s Dictionary, 1755)

FORM – THE ANTITHESIS OF SUBSTANCE; the APPEARANCE OR SUPERFICIAL

ASPECT RATHER THAN THE SUBSTANCE OR THE ESSENCE. (Ballentine’s Legal
Dictionary, 3rd Edition)

FORM - Noun - SHOW WITHOUT SUBSTANCE; EMPTY, OUTSIDE APPEARANCE; vain,

trivial, or conventional CEREMONY; conventionality; formality; as, A MATTER OF MERE
FORM. A shape; AN IMAGE; A PHANTOM. (Webster’s Unabridged)

NATURAL PERSON - Any HUMAN BEING who AS SUCH IS A LEGAL ENTITY… (Max
Radin, Radin’s Law Dictionary, 1955, p. 216 - Amon v. Moreschi, 296 N.Y. 395, 73 N.E.2d 716.)

!828
 LEGAL - “…UNDOING OF GOD’S LAW.” (1893 Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, Encyclopedia
Britannica)

CHARACT and CHARACTER - noun - 1. A MARK made by cutting or engraving, as on

stone, metal or other hard material; hence, a MARK OR FIGURE made with a PEN OR
STYLE, ON PAPER, OR OTHER MATERIAL USED TO CONTAIN WRITING; a letter, or
FIGURE USED TO FORM WORDS, AND COMMUNICATE IDEAS. CHARACTERS ARE
LITERAL, as the letters of an alphabet; numeral, as the arithmetical Þgures; emblematical or
symbolical, which express things or ideas; and abbreviations, as C. For centrum, a hundred;
lb. For libra, a pound; adjective D. Anno domini; etc. 2. A MARK or Þgure made by stamping or
IMPRESSION, as on coins. 3. The manner of writing; the peculiar from of letters used by a
particular person. You know the character to be your brothers. 4. The peculiar qualities,
impressed by nature or HABIT ON A PERSON, which distinguish him from others; these
constitute real character, and the qualities which he is SUPPOSED TO POSSESS,
CONSTITUTE HIS ESTIMATED CHARACTER, OR REPUTATION. Hence we say, A
CHARACTER IS NOT FORMED, WHEN THE PERSON HAS NOT ACQUIRED STABLE
AND DISTINCTIVE QUALITIES. 5. AN ACCOUNT, DESCRIPTION or
REPRESENTATION of any THING, exhibiting its qualities and the circumstances attending
it; as, to give a bad character to a town, or to a road. 6. A PERSON; as, the assembly consisted
of various characters, eminent characters, and low characters. All the characters in the play
appeared to advantage. The friendship of distinguished characters. 7. BY WAY OF
EMINENCE, distinguished or good qualities; THOSE WHICH ARE ESTEEMED AND
RESPECTED; and those which are ASCRIBED TO A PERSON IN COMMON
ESTIMATION. We enquire whether a stranger is a man of character. 8. ADVENTITIOUS
QUALITIES IMPRESSED BY OFFICE, OR STATION; THE QUALITIES THAT, IN PUBLIC
ESTIMATION, BELONG TO A PERSON IN A PARTICULAR STATION; as when we ask
how a magistrate, or commander SUPPORTS HIS CHARACTER. 9. In natural history, the
peculiar discriminating qualities or properties of animals, plants and minerals. These
properties, when employed FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCRIMINATING minerals, are called
characters. - verb transitive - 1. To engrave; to inscribe. 2. A particular aspect or conÞguration of
the heavens. (Webs1828)

—=—

In law, man is by default not automatically considered as an animal (soulless). Man’s rationality
(reason) separates him from the beasts in this way. It is his marks and outward signs that cause him
to be considered as more or less than he is (I Am), and by the actions taken by the man in
consideration of that Þctional law, as that which is impressed upon his imaginations. But manÕs law
is not a protection in this regard, for we know that the principles (maxims) of law certainly and
without question allow for man’s fall, just as God does. It’s all voluntary.

—=—

“To err is HUMAN.”

—ancient Latin proverb, as: errare humanum est


—=—

“To err is humane, to forgive, divine.”

—Alexander Pope, English poet, from his poem ‘An Essay on Criticism,’ Part II (1711). At the time, humane was the common spelling used for the word human. 

—=—

!829
Man in his spiritual substance is an Act of God, thus man is an Act of perfection. He is born into
Nature already for-given (Divine/without sin). We are all born innocent (without words, without
syn), but the pirates and their agents are ever lurking, seeking to plug us into the commercial
artiÞce every chance they get, for their bounty for every spiritual death they impersonate into
bondage, for every strawman after-birthed and delivered, is paid in mammon.



When man errs against God’s Law, this is an act of the sophist in hu-manity. Legal and
ecclesiastical systems are always of human nature (in err), not of the Perfection of God’s Nature
(Divine), for they are only creations of man’s invention of re-creation, not of the Source of Nature.
To name any man as a person (legal identity) so as to accuse him of a legal (Þctional) crime is to
cause err upon that man, to throw a stumbling block in his path, while to ambiguously forgive that
same man is to treat him Divinely, as part of the Oneness of Jehovah. This is True Love.

ERR - verb intransitive - [Latin erro.] 1. TO WANDER FROM THE RIGHT WAY; TO DEVIATE
FROM THE TRUE COURSE OR PURPOSE. But errs not nature from this gracious end, From
burning suns when livid deaths descend? 2. TO MISS THE RIGHT WAY, IN MORALS OR
RELIGION; TO DEVIATE FROM THE PATH OR LINE OF DUTY; TO STRAY BY DESIGN
OR MISTAKE. We have erred and strayed like lost sheep. 3. To mistake; to commit error; TO
DO WRONG FROM IGNORANCE OR INATTENTION. Men err in judgment from
ignorance, from want of attention to facts, or from previous bias of mind. 4. To wander; to
ramble. A storm of strokes, well meant, with fury ßies, And errs about their temples, ears, and
eyes. (Webs1828)

—=—

Remember that to act Divinely may mean under the Law of Jehovah or under the licensed anarchy
of false gods or anything that is deiÞed to be falsely divine. One may consider Lucifer (darkness) as
the divine light. Divination is the action (verb) of heathens, while the doing of works Divinely
(adjective) is to express the Word and will (Testament) of God through christ’s example. For this no
reward of the ßesh is gained, nor would it be expected for Purely Loving, spiritual acts. True
Divineness is not a bargain, but a gift. And it is when all of a man’s Life is dedicated to giving that
the Law is fulÞlled. Forgiveness is perhaps the most Divine of all negative Law actions, for all
things artful and of deceit require accusation and positive feedback toward the legal matrix. Ab-
solute forgiveness is a prerequisite for Natural Freedom under God’s Law. We can hold onto no-
thing of their artiÞcially created world of terms and laws, offering no respect of persons, places or
things by our vengeful desires for false, legal justice by them. The legal system is a beast that feeds
off of such hatred and accusatory error. Its magic and authority is only invoked when its patented
words (names) are summoned to appear. However, the state may have no power if no man is
charged to be its person (status/property) or with its crime. These are positive actions, requiring
inÞnitely more effort and energy than the negative actions of Loving forgiveness, of non-trivial
pursuit. We must rise above such trißing, vulgar, public exhibitions, for our only reward there can
be in mammon, causing our Þnancial debt to rise and our spiritual death to strengthen and subsist.

EXHIBITION - noun - [Latin exhibitio.] The act of exhibiting for inspection; a showing or
presenting to view; display. 1. THE OFFERING, PRODUCING OR SHOWING OF TITLES,
AUTHORITIES OR PAPERS OF ANY KIND BEFORE A TRIBUNAL, IN PROOF OF
FACTS. 2. PUBLIC SHOW; REPRESENTATION of feats or actions in public; display of
oratory in public; any public show. 3. Allowance of meat and drink; pension; salary;
benefaction settled for the maintenance of scholars in universities, not depending on the
foundation. 4. Payment; recompense. (Webs1828)

EXHIBERE - TO PRESENT A THING CORPOREALLY, SO THAT IT MAY BE HANDLED.

TO APPEAR PERSONALLY TO CONDUCT THE DEFENSE OF AN ACTION AT LAW.
(Black4)

EXHIBITANT - A complainant in articles of the peace. (Black4)

!830
 EXHIBITED - Displayed. (Black4)

EXHIBIT - verb - TO SHOW OR DISPLAY; to offer or present for inspection. TO PRODUCE

ANYTHING IN PUBLIC, SO THAT IT MAY BE TAKEN INTO POSSESSION. To present;
TO OFFER PUBLICLY OR OFFICIALLY; TO FILE OF RECORD. Thus we speak of
EXHIBITING A CHARGE of treason, EXHIBITING A BILL against an ofÞcer of the king's
bench by way of proceeding against him in that court. TO ADMINISTER; to cause to be
taken; as medicines. TO SUBMIT TO A COURT OR OFFICER IN COURSE OF
PROCEEDINGS. The word implies SOME AFFIRMATIVE ACT or at least some conduct on
part of person charged with duty of exhibiting a thing or who exhibits. - noun - A paper or
document produced and exhibited to a court during a trial or hearing, or to a commissioner
taking depositions, or to auditors, arbitrators, etc., as a voucher, or in proof of facts, or as
otherwise connected with the subject-matter, and which, on being accepted, IS MARKED
FOR IDENTIFICATION AND ANNEXED to the deposition, report, or other principal
document, OR FILED OF RECORD, or otherwise made a part of the case. A paper referred to
in and Þled with the bill, answer, or petition in a suit in equity, or with a deposition. (Black4)

ACTION - Conduct; behavior; something done; the condition of acting; an act or series of
acts… In Practice, THE LEGAL AND FORMAL DEMAND OF ONE'S RIGHT FROM
ANOTHER PERSON OR PARTY MADE AND INSISTED ON IN A COURT OF JUSTICE…
JUDICIAL REMEDY FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OR PROTECTION OF A RIGHT… Civil
actions are such as lie in behalf of persons to enforce their rights or obtain redress of wrongs
in their relation to individuals. Common law actions are such as will lie, on the particular
facts, at common law, WITHOUT THE AID OF A STATUTE… (Black4)

ACTIO VULGARIS - A legal action; common action. Sometimes used for actio directa. (Black2)

—=—

All legal actions are vulgar, petty, common, being beneath the snobby noble or the regenerate man
of God. The system simply cannot continue if no action is brought to court, if no one was being
constantly charged with crimes in Þction, if the persons of men were not respected as the scriptures
over and over instruct. No persons, no organized crime (government). For organized crime is
merely government extortion (taxation) of its own property (citizenships in persona/status). With-
out the mask of surety to some government personhood (property), no charge may be applied to
any man. Only by one’s respect of persons may one become a debtor under some devilish contract.

To Love thy enemy through forgiveness is the brightest Light upon that narrowly righteous path of
christ. It clears the soul and cleans the spiritual palate. For hatred equates to respect of something
artiÞcial, and vengeance is the act of a madman. One must not deviate from oneÕs own path merely
to get even with some artiÞcial persona (mask), for there is no such place as even. Evenness is al-
ways a false valuation in mammon, in science or in math, but never is of God’s Nature. Our debt,
our promise, is to God and God alone. All else, as whatever may distract you from the path, is only
ever the work and temptation of the designs of the adversary.

—=—

“OUR RULERS CAN HAVE NO AUTHORITY OVER NATURAL RIGHTS,

ONLY AS WE HAVE SUBMITTED TO THEM. The rights of conscience we
never submitted. WE ARE ANSWERABLE FOR THEM TO OUR
GOD. THE LEGITIMATE POWERS OF GOVERNMENT EXTEND TO
SUCH ACTS ONLY AS INJURIOUS TO OTHERS.” 
—Thomas Jefferson

—=—

!831
There can be no injury to ÒpersonsÓ or ÒpropertyÓ if these artiÞcial constructs of Þction are never
invoked. The privateers of the States stay private by avoiding such public methodologies, and
retain the negative protections written in the constitution only because they have not waived or
given up any of their Natural Rights to that nation/district they created. We must always re-
member that to take any beneÞt of legal personhood and usufruct in property from the state, we
are required to submit to the state under implied contract our ability to claim Natural Rights
against itÕs artiÞcial person (body politic). For we cannot have two masters. Do you not see that
only through Loving Forgiveness without the impossible to quench lust and desire for money can
we set each other free from this legal matrix? It is a moral test, and we are failing it miserably as the
courts are overloaded with persons suing persons, invoking each others bond and mark of surety
with every commercial action we take. We are dragging down and keeping each other in the
administrative system of this debtorÕs hell.

And so when man seeks forgiveness from men acting as imperfect gods (judges), which is due to
an error by his purely humanistic actions, this act of forgiveness, that is, to pretend Òto forgiveÓ
legally or ecclesiastically, is an act of artiÞcial, magical, nonspiritual divination by those false
magistrate gods. Magicians deal only in illusion, never in the Real. Of course, a legal god can only
forgive a legal person (Þction) in legal action, as that which only exists in false name and title. A
manÕs crimes against Nature, against what is Real, are only ever his own, for Jehovah respects no
persons, titles, or other proprietary words of men, and does not recognize any manÕs invisible
hiding places (jurisdictions). The legal Þction of kingdoms can only forgive on paper (with
proprietary, unnatural words). The soul is never cleansed through the black moo-mooÕd
opinionated judgement of administrative law. A judge, similarly to the character of christ, is a
personiÞcation of the legal law. A ÒjudgeÓ (ßattering legal title) is never a Real man, and so never a
man of God. No Truth Exists in any ÒjudgeÓ (false god).

We do not get away with crimes in GodÕs eyes. We are not pardoned for our crimes under God. We
cannot have our crimes or sins removed from our soul (permanent spiritual record) as they can be
magically removed (erased) from the temporary legal registrarÕs records of our Þctional person,
which doesnÕt really Exist in Nature. They are a permanent stain upon our soul, and no legal judge
may alter, forgive, pardon, or abate that Truth. Only in the legal realm can crimes be overlooked,
pardoned, remitted, licensed, or legally pretended to be forgiven. But the soul is never cleansed of
the crime, only the record of the artiÞcial person, which carries no weight in GodÕs Realm of self-
Existence. There is no excuse before God in Nature, for under that Highest Law of Nature man is
always responsible for his own actions. God is certainly no apologist for Its own Creation, Its own
Self-Existence! And the church certainly has no power to pardon your sins, even while it pretends
to be God by using Its Name in blasphemy.

However, the man that can be made to believe that the Þctional church and state can and will for-
give his sinful actions is the most dangerous man alive. It is more frightening to consider that per-
haps this is the most common of men alive today as well, who hide behind the cross, the Star of
David (Seal of Solomon), or some other religious or legal symbology while wrapping themselves in
the armor of their national ßag in justiÞcation for all possible crimes. Sounds strangely enough like
the typical AmericanÉ

A pardon can only be received by a legal person (property of the state), bestowed upon the name or
ßattering title of a man acting in the agency and legal capacity of personhood and in receivership.
Not only is the crime a sin, but the pardon for the crime just as sinful (syn-thetic). Temporal
forgiveness merely causes an inducement for future crimes, a license to sin, which is the blueprint
of how the church and state operate. A sovereign always forgives and makes divine (perfect) its
own crimes.

FORGIVE - verb transitive - ForgivÕ, preterit tense forgave; participle passive forgiven. [Latin
remitto. See Give.] 1. TO PARDON; TO REMIT, as an offense or DEBT; TO OVERLOOK AN
OFFENSE, and treat the offender as not guilty. The original and proper phrase is to forgive
the offense, TO SEND IT AWAY, to reject it, that is, NOT TO IMPUTE IT [PUT IT TO] THE

!832
 OFFENDER. But by an easy transition, we also use the phrase, to forgive the PERSON
offending. Forgive us our debts. If we forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly father will
also forgive you. Matthew 6:12. AS SAVAGES NEVER FORGET A FAVOR, SO THEY
NEVER FORGIVE AN INJURY. It is to be noted that pardon, like forgive may be followed by
the name or person, and by the offense; but remit can be followed by the offense only. WE
FORGIVE OR PARDON THE MAN, BUT WE DO NOT REMIT HIM. 2. To remit as a debt,
Þne or penalty. (Webs1828)

PARDON - verb transitive - [Latin per and dono, to give; per having the sense of the English for
in forgive, and re in Latin remitto, properly to give back or away.] 1. TO FORGIVE; TO
REMIT; as an offense or crime. GUILT IMPLIES A BEING BOUND OR SUBJECTED TO
CENSURE, PENALTY OR PUNISHMENT. TO PARDON IS TO GIVE UP THIS
OBLIGATION, and release the offender. WE APPLY THE WORD TO THE CRIME OR TO
THE PERSON. We pardon an offense, when WE REMOVE IT FROM THE OFFENDER and
consider him as not guilty; we pardon the offender, when we release or absolve him from
his liability to suffer punishment. I pray thee, pardon my sin. 1 Samuel 15:25. 2. To remit, as a
penalty. I pardon thee thy life before thou ask it. 3. TO EXCUSE, as for a fault. 4. Pardon me,
is a phrase used when one asks for excuse, or makes an APOLOGY, and it is often used in
this sense, WHEN A PERSON MEANS CIVILLY TO DENY OR CONTRADICT WHAT
ANOTHER AFFIRMS. - noun - Forgiveness; the release of an offense or of the obligation of
the offender TO SUFFER A PENALTY, or to bear the displeasure of the offended party. We
seek the pardon of sins, transgressions and offenses. 1. REMISSION OF A PENALTY. An
amnesty is a general pardon. 2. Forgiveness received. (Webs1828)

REMIT - verb transitive - [Latin remitto, to send back; re and mitto, to send.] 1. To relax, as
intensity; to make less tense or violent. So willingly doth God remit his ire. 2. To forgive; TO
SURRENDER THE RIGHT OF PUNISHING A CRIME; AS, TO REMIT PUNISHMENT. 3.
To pardon, as a fault or crime. WHOSE SOEVER SINS YE REMIT THEY ARE REMITTED
TO THEM. John 20:23. 4. TO GIVE UP; to resign. In grievous and inhuman crimes, offenders
should be remitted to their prince. 5. To refer; as a clause that remitted all to the bishop's
discretion. 6. To send back. The pris'ner was remitted to the guard. 7. TO TRANSMIT
MONEY, bills or other thing in payment for goods received. American merchants remit
money, bills of exchange or some species of stock, in payment for British goods. 8. TO
RESTORE. In this case, the law remits him to his ancient and more certain right. - verb
intransitive - 1. To slacken; to become less intense or rigorous. When our passions remit the
vehemence of our speech remits too. So we say, cold or heat remits. 2. To abate in violence for
a time, without intermission; as, a fever remits at a certain hour every day. (Webs1828)

—=—

So what is the difference between legal forgiveness and legal remittence?

A legal entity, as a judge (attorney), may only ever legally forgive a legal debt, and this implies that
such a debt was attached before any so-called legal crime was committed. Fiction, in other words,
may only forgive its own Þctions. This is the nature of a performance debtor (citizenship). We must
reconsider the original sin; the legal birth process. For a man is guilty by association to the nation of
which he is borne into and acts within commercially. That ethnic or “ancestral” sin cannot be for-
given in such forums. The original sin is what allows the judge (false god) to have the power to
forgive legal sins in the Þrst place. But the original sin (personhood) is never surrendered. The man
in persona (legal, artful mask) remains a debtor to the state in contractual sin despite the state’s
forgiveness for his committed sins. A debtor in debtor’s hell never leaves hell until he remits himself
of that original sin. This is the fate of manÕs acceptance of that artiÞcial life lived under a legal
person-hood; an admission (admit) of spiritual death. To forgive is to remove the charge of any
crime from the person, and thus the man (agent) of that persona. To remit is only to forgive or par-
don the punishment, not the crime. The spirit must forgive all, lest its desire for vengeance or
compensation in mammon overwhelm the spirit and cause us to fall back into legal (anti-God) law,

!833
which requires the embracement of its false magistrates (gods). This harms us as complainant
(exhibitant) just as much as it does he who is exhibited as the defendant. We both are caused to fall
into Þction to solve non-existent (legal) crimes by non-existent (legal) remedies.

The mere act of stating one’s surname for the record of the court as a general “appearance” is an
admission of guilt towards oneÕs already felonious, legal existence in persona (Þction). When one
admits the big lie (to acting in the agency of a districted persona, not as a man of God), oneÕs charge
of spiritual death (civil life) is clearly established as a conÞrmed and unavoidable legal truth, and it
becomes self-evident that oneÕs discharge (exoneration) from that state of dead being (noun) may
only be obtained through the exoneration of Þction and reclamation of a spiritual Life. One must be
reborn into oneÕs Source as a spiritual man without legal title in surety and personhood for another.
One must choose oneÕs Law and have obedience only towards that election of Its God (Law-
maker/Creator) alone as Highest.

ADMIT - verb transitive - [Latin admitto, from ad and mitto, to send.] 1. To suffer to enter; to
grant entrance; whether into a place, or an ofÞce, or into the mind, or consideration; as to
admit a student into college; to admit a serious thought into the mind. 2. TO GIVE RIGHT of
entrance; as, a ticket admits one into a play house. 3. To allow; TO RECEIVE AS TRUE; as,
the argument or FACT IS ADMITTED. 4. TO PERMIT, GRANT OR ALLOW, OR TO BE
CAPABLE OF; as, the words do not admit of such a construction. In this sense, of may be
used after the verb, or omitted. (Webs1828)

ABSOLVE - verb transitive - AbzolvÕ, [Latin absolvo, from ab and solvo, to loose or release; to
absolve to Þnish; Hebrew to loose or loosen. See Solve.] TO SET FREE OR RELEASE FROM
SOME OBLIGATION, DEBT OR RESPONSIBILITY; OR FROM THAT WHICH SUBJECTS
A PERSON TO A BURDEN OR PENALTY; as to absolve a person FROM A PROMISE; to
absolve an offender, which amounts to an acquittal and remission of his punishment.
Hence, in the civil law, the word was used for acquit; and in the canon law, for FORGIVE, or a
sentence of remission. In ordinary language, its sense is TO SET FREE OR RELEASE FROM
AN ENGAGEMENT. Formerly, good writers used the word in the sense of FINISH,
ACCOMPLISH; as to absolve work, in Milton; but in this sense, it seems to be obsolete.
(Webs1828)

EXONERATE - To relieve, to exculpate. (Black4)

EXONERATION - THE REMOVAL OF A BURDEN, CHARGE, OR DUTY. Particularly, THE

ACT OF RELIEVING A PERSON OR ESTATE FROM A CHARGE OR LIABILITY by
casting the same upon another person or estate. A right or equity which exists between those
who are successively liable for the same debt. "A surety who discharges an obligation is
entitled to look to the principal for reimbursement, and to invoke the aid of a court of
equity for this purpose, and a subsequent surety who, by the terms of the contract, is
responsible only in case of the default of the principal and a prior surety, MAY CLAIM
EXONERATION AT THE HANDS OF EITHER.Ó A right to have a fund applied to payment
of guaranteed claims. The right which a PERSON has who has been compelled to pay what
another should be forced to pay in full. (Black4)

DIVINE - adjective - [Latin, A GOD.] 1. Pertaining to the TRUE GOD; as the DIVINE
NATURE; divine perfections… (Webs1828)

DIVINE - adjective - [Latin, A GOD.] É2. Pertaining to a HEATHEN DEITY, or to FALSE

GODS. 3. PARTAKING OF THE NATURE OF GOD. HALF HUMAN, HALF DIVINE. 4.
Proceeding from God; AS DIVINE JUDGMENTS. 5. GODLIKE; HEAVENLY; excellent in
the highest DEGREE; EXTRAORDINARY; APPARENTLY ABOVE WHAT IS HUMAN. In
this application the word admits of comparison; as a divine INVENTION; a divine GENIUS;
THE DIVINEST MIND. A DIVINE SENTENCE IS IN THE LIPS OF THE KING. Proverbs
16:10. 6. Presageful; foreboding; prescient. [Not used.] 7. Appropriated to God, or celebrating

!834
 his praise; as divine SERVICE; divine songs; divine worship. - noun - 1. A MINISTER of the
gospel; A PRIEST; A CLERGYMAN. The Þrst divines of New England were surpassed by
none in extensive erudition, personal sanctity, and diligence in the pastoral ofÞce. 2. A MAN
SKILLED IN DIVINITY; a theologian; as a great divine. - verb transitive - [Latin 1. To
foreknow; to foretell; to presage. Darst thou divine his downfall? 2. TO DEIFY. [Not in use.] -
verb intransitive - 1. TO USE OR PRACTICE DIVINATION. 2. To utter presages or
prognostications. THE PROPHETS THEREOF DIVINE FOR MONEY. Micah 3:6. 3. To have
presages or forebodings. Suggest but truth to my divining thoughtsÑ 4. To guess or
CONJECTURE. Could you divine what lovers bear. (Webs1828)

DIVINITY - noun - [Latin] 1. The state of being divine; Deity; Godhead; THE NATURE OR
ESSENCE OF GOD. Christians ascribe divinity to one Supreme Being only. 2. God; the
Deity; the Supreme Being. Tis the divinity that stirs within us. 3. A FALSE GOD; A
PRETENDED DEITY OF PAGANS. Beastly divinities, and droves of gods. 4. A CELESTIAL
BEING, INFERIOR TO THE SUPREME GOD, BUT SUPERIOR TO MAN. Many NATIONS
believe in these inferior divinities. 5. Something SUPERNATURAL. They say there is
divinity in odd numbers. 6. The SCIENCE of divine THINGS; THE SCIENCE WHICH
UNFOLDS THE CHARACTER OF GOD, his laws and moral government, the duties of
man, and the way of salvation; THEOLOGY; as the study of divinity; a SYSTEM of divinity.
(Webs1828)

DIVINER - noun - 1. ONE WHO PROFESSES DIVINATION; ONE WHO PRETENDS TO

PREDICT EVENTS, OR TO REVEAL OCCULT THINGS, by the aid of superior beings, or
of supernatural means. THESE NATIONS HEARKENED TO DIVINERS. Deuteronomy
18:14. 2. One who guesses; A CONJECTURER. (Webs1828)

CONJECTURER - noun - One who guesses; a guesser; ONE WHO FORMS OR UTTERS AN
OPINION WITHOUT PROOF. (Webs1828)

VANITY - noun - [Latin vanitas, from vanus, vain.] 1. EMPTINESS; WANT OF SUBSTANCE
to satisfy desire; uncertainty; inanity. Vanity of vanities, said the preacher; all is vanity.
Ecclesiastes 1:2. 2. Fruitless desire or endeavor. VANITY POSSESSETH MANY WHO ARE
DESIROUS TO KNOW THE CERTAINTY OF THINGS TO COME. 3. TRIFLING LABOR
THAT PRODUCES NO GOOD. 4. Emptiness; UNTRUTH. Here I may well show the vanity
of what is reported in the story of Walsingham. 5. Empty pleasure; vain pursuit; IDLE SHOW;
UNSUBSTANTIAL ENJOYMENT. Sin with vanity had Þll'd the works of men. Think not
when woman's transient breath is ßed, that all her vanities at once are dead; succeeding
vanities she still regards. 6. Ostentation; ARROGANCE. 7. INFLATION OF MIND upon
slight grounds; EMPTY PRIDE, INSPIRED BY AN OVERWEENING CONCEIT OF ONE'S
PERSONAL ATTAINMENTS OR DECORATIONS. Fops cannot be cured of their vanity.
VANITY IS THE FOOD OF FOOLS. No man sympathizes with the sorrows of vanity.
(Webs1828)

Ñ=Ñ

Vanity is but a fruit plucked and eaten from that forbidden tree of knowledge (vain concepts).
When we look in the mirror and we believe (love) that what we see is the Real world, then we are
hopelessly lost in Þction. This is allegorical to all that exists as the legal realm without (outside of)
God, as that which exists without substance. Amazingly, to contemplate a Life without (outside of)
God is indeed paradoxical, as that which is impossible; an existence somehow without (outside of)
Existence. We may deny Jehovah (self-Existence) and Its Law in our mind, but in no way may we
ever actually be without (outside of) Jehovah. We are It and It is us. Systems of control rely solely
on the power to pretend that True Existence is possible without (outside of) God. It is not. But belief
(love) in such artiÞce as utter Self-deceit as to the obvious Truth and Law of LifeÉ this is the key to
the circular legal matrix of government.

!835
It is important to note that divinity is not a concept of God (Nature). For Jehovah is self-Evident as
all of the Permanence of Being in Nature, needing not the vain want or desire to prove to man Its
obvious Existence. Thus the behavior of men towards their religious entrainments, their religions,
and their tone and way of speaking, has nothing to do with Jehovah. These are but the learned
behaviors and ceremonies of men, and in general are only the worship of idols. The behaviors of
these church-goers, from the dogmatic swaying prayers of the Jews to the bow-on-the-knees
Muslim to the Southern Baptist cat-callers that yell “hallelujah”or “praise the lord” after every
catchphrase their deiÞed reverend makes, has absolutely nothing to do with True spirituality in
Harmony with Nature, with Jehovah and Its Law, or with Jesus christ. This is the foolishness and
vain custom of corporate religion and nothing else, for none of these actors are following the Word
(Law/Son) of God. It takes not a special language or way of acting in a mask (persona), it just
requires the Law to be followed and the Truth to always be told and worshiped above all else!

But for this, these pretenders must obtain knowledge of the Law from the scriptures. Now how is
that going to happen when all they listen to week after week is a bunch of virtual car-salesmen
peddling to them the false-salvation of mammon and the legal law of the land (judicial opinion)?

Only man has use for the art and practice of divinity, for only men need prove themselves to be
gods over other men. Nature in and of Itself never requires proof of its self-evidence of Existence as
part of God, nor does it contain any ego that it would need such proofs. The divinity of man, as a
purely legal (i.e., ecclesiastical) status, is a wholly unnatural conceit; a vanity of the ages passed on
to each new generation of empty souls under jeweled crowns.

If a king (sovereign) Truly ruled under this notion of the divine Nature of God and under the
teachings of christ, then a king would only exist to serve and ensure that the Law of God is follow-
ed above all else. The king would have no riches or wealth or holdings of land for rents. The king
would endorse no artiÞce or other statute. The king would practice no judgement and never suffer
of vanity. And the king by necessity of God’s Law would outlaw all legal laws, ideas, and other
things of artiÞce. In this way, the idea of man as king (God incarnate) is at best the dreamful state of
a gloriÞed but ultimately false-presentation of a history to justify current and future kings, and at
worse fairly close to what we have in “existence” today.

But in our modern times, there is no “religious test” for kings and presidents, and the US
constitution states clearly that no religious (moral) test shall be required for political (legal) ofÞce.
After all, half of congressmen are already devils (attorneys)! Kings are not chosen by their devotion
to the divinity of Jehovah, but need only show bloodline relation to inherit that political (legal)
ofÞce by their own false, fabled divinity as an accident of birth. And so we should rather expect
that a legally considered king would act in a strict legal capacity, that is, as a man opposed to the
very God he claims as his divine right to rule. This paradox is so very difÞcult to comprehend, and
yet is foretold straight from the Bible, speaking disparagingly of these diviners of false law and
faith (contractual, artiÞcial trust).

Of all the puzzles presented by christ in the scriptural parables, it was perhaps this single utterance
that stands truly unchallenged by all men seeking power through such false divinity. And so I re-
peat it here:

—=—

ÒÉHe that is without sin among you, let him Þrst cast a stone at her.”
—John 8: 7, KJB

—=—

By this precedent, would not a king be held to the same standards? Would not a lawmaker’s own
law need be lawful under God’s Law before casting any ballot of opinion on legal matters, which

!836
would mean he must absolutely abolish all of his legal (artiÞcial) considerations and judgements in
line of Nature and Its undeniable Law? Would not a judge need to surrender in good conscious his
bench in tenure by the very legal (false) name, ßattering title, and authority he so proclaims in sin
against God to respect and judge other menÕs persons and cast such artful, pretended stumbling
blocks (stones) before all who stand to be barred before his false magistracy?

Whom among us all could possibly rule by the stone (judgement) if rule by such legal laws requires
abandoning GodÕs Law? Truly, what Þctional person could possibly stand in anything but the
stateÕs predeÞned doom? What debtor could possibly judge anything with integrity when he
himself exists only in the false appearance and illusionary protections of contracted sin?

Of course, the StrongÕs Lexicon entry for the word stone is #G3037 - lithos (λίθος), and is meant as a
Þgurative term that, while it can referentially mean small and large stones, is a metaphor to such
spiritual building stones.

“…of building stones; metaphor of christ: one whose words, acts, end, men (so stumble at)
take such offense at, that they reject him and thus bring upon themselves ruin (so stumbling
stones)… of Christians: LIVING STONES, OF WHICH THE TEMPLE OF GOD IS BUILT (1
Peter 2); of the truths with which, as with building materials, A TEACHER BUILDS
CHRISTIANS UP IN WISDOM, costly stones (1 Corinthians 3: 12). Of precious stones, gems:
stones cut in certain form: stone tablets (engraved with letters), statues of idols (Acts 17: 22;
Ezekiel 20: 32).Ó

—=—

How difÞcult it is to consider our own words and actions as only the stumbling stones of others
and even to ourselves, that we should cast our own opinions and judgements upon another based
on Þction instead of teaching the wisdom of scripture with forgiveness, love, and devotion even to
our enemies. These harsh words, especially the strict legal law as expressed in its dog-Latin
foundation, are indeed the heaviest stones of all.

—=—

“They build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity. THE
HEADS THEREOF JUDGE FOR REWARD, AND THE PRIESTS
THEREOF TEACH FOR HIRE, AND THE PROPHETS THEREOF
DIVINE FOR MONEY YET WILL THEY LEAN UPON THE LORD, and
say, Is not the LORD among us? none evil can come upon us. Therefore
shall Zion for your sake be plowed as a Þeld, and Jerusalem shall
become heaps, and the mountain of the house as the high places of the
forest.”
—Micah 3: 9-12, KJB

—=—

“They have seen vanity and LYING DIVINATION, saying, The LORD
saith: and the LORD hath not sent them: AND THEY HAVE MADE
OTHERS TO HOPE THAT THEY WOULD CONFIRM THE WORD.
Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken A LYING
DIVINATION, whereas ye say, The LORD saith it; albeit I have not

!837
 spoken? Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because ye have spoken
vanity, and seen lies, therefore, behold, I am against you, saith the Lord
GOD. And mine hand shall be upon the prophets that see vanity, and
that DIVINE LIES: THEY SHALL NOT BE IN THE ASSEMBLY OF MY
PEOPLE, neither shall they be written in the writing of the house of
Israel, neither shall they enter into the land of Israel; and ye shall know
that I am the Lord GOD.”
—Ezekiel 13: 6-9, KJB

—=—

“And will ye pollute me among my people for handfuls of barley and

for pieces of bread, to slay the souls that should not die, and to save the
souls alive that should not live, by your lying to my people that hear
your lies? …Because with lies ye have made the heart of the righteous
sad, whom I have not made sad; AND STRENGTHENED THE HANDS
OF THE WICKED, THAT HE SHOULD NOT RETURN FROM HIS
WICKED WAY, BY PROMISING HIM LIFE: Therefore ye shall see no
more vanity, NOR DIVINE DIVINATIONS: for I will deliver my people
out of your hand: and ye shall know that I am the LORD.”
—Ezekiel 13: 19, and 22-23, KJB

—=—

“Whiles they see vanity unto thee, WHILES THEY DIVINE A LIE
UNTO THEE, to bring thee upon the necks of them that are slain, of the
wicked, whose day is come, when their iniquity shall have an end. Shall
I cause it to return into his sheath? I WILL JUDGE THEE IN THE
PLACE WHERE THOU WAST CREATED, IN THE LAND OF THY
NATIVITY. And I will pour out mine indignation upon thee, I will blow
against thee in the Þre of my wrath, AND DELIVER THEE INTO THE
HAND OF BRUTISH MEN, AND SKILLFUL TO DESTROY.”
—Ezekiel 21: 29-31, KJB

—=—

“Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the KNOWLEDGE of

God, and of Jesus our Lord, According as his divine power hath given
unto us all things that pertain unto LIFE and godliness, through the
knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: Whereby are
given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: THAT BY THESE

!838
 YE MIGHT BE PARTAKERS OF THE DIVINE NATURE, HAVING
ESCAPED THE CORRUPTION THAT IS IN THE WORLD through lust.
And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to
virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance
patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness;
and to brotherly kindness CHARITY. FOR IF THESE THINGS BE IN
YOU, AND ABOUND, THEY MAKE YOU THAT YE SHALL NEITHER
BE BARREN NOR UNFRUITFUL IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF OUR
LORD JESUS CHRIST. BUT HE THAT LACKETH THESE THINGS IS
BLIND, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged
from his old sins. Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to MAKE
YOUR CALLING AND ELECTION SURE: for if ye do these things, YE
SHALL NEVER FALL: For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you
abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ.”
—2 Peter 1: 3-9, KJB

—=—

“When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee,
THOU SHALT NOT LEARN TO DO AFTER THE ABOMINATIONS OF
THOSE NATIONS. There shall not be found among you any one that
maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the Þre, OR THAT USETH
DIVINATION, OR AN OBSERVER OF TIMES, or an enchanter, or a
witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, OR A
NECROMANCER. For all that do these things are an abomination unto
the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth
drive them out from before thee. Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy
God. FOR THESE NATIONS, WHICH THOU SHALT POSSESS,
HEARKENED UNTO OBSERVERS OF TIMES, AND UNTO DIVINERS:
but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.”
—Deuteronomy 18: 9-14, KJB

—=—

“To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the
power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and
INHERITANCE among them which are sanctiÞed by faith that is in me.”
—Acts 26:18, KJB

—=—

!839
 —=—

“And no marvel; for Satan himself


is transformed into an angel of LIGHT.”
—2 Corinthians 11:14, KJB

—=—

The scriptures warn that it is certain most men will be deceived by all the many artiÞces and
adversaries we have seen manifest in these modern technological (artful) times. After reading this,
will you continue to admit to being a dead human, destined to receive with pride the permanent
mark of that vain, legal id-entity, or would you like to learn how to be considered only as a Living
and spiritual man under the Permanent Being of God by that legal realm and its agents in non-
Þction? The Bible is totally and utterly against legal law, personhood, citizenship, titles, oaths, debt,
money, surety, and any other legal concepts only known to and created by man. It’s against the
organized church (for each man alone is the temple) and against the organized state (for GodÕs Law
alone should be followed). Does this surprise you, or have you just never actually read and deÞned
these terms that are the negative foundation of all Law?

You can read the scriptures in condemnation and demonize them, if only because the corporate
church, state, and counter-culture promotes this, using them instead as an utterly fallacious appeal
to its own authority, or you can read the Bible and under-stand its words despite such Þction,
applying its teachings in and as the Highest and only Law. As the scriptures and the legal state
make clear, this is our voluntary choice and our election must be sure. And that’s exactly where we
all stand, with a choice between legal mammon (money) or the Natural Law (Love).

I will however tell you one thing about this book of scriptural knowledge… it is the most
subversive book you will ever read, if you will only learn its language and discover the True intent
and meaning of every word presented. Webster’s 1828 dictionary stands as a big help and reference
with this task. We are surrounded by that which is subversive to God and destructive of Its Nature
and Design, for this is the essence and purpose of church and state. The subversiveness I speak of is
that which is subversive to almost every aspect of our pretended lives in this legal hell, to that
which enslaves us. It offers heaven on Earth, which subverts the hell we are thrown into by our
own events and scenes of nativity. One thing is for sure, punk rock music, earrings and tattoos,
drugs, and political action groups are not a salvation, for these are only the tools of the idiocracy
designed and allowed not to change the system, but to distract and keep us all in it. Protests and
petitions (nouns) are not a solution, and are seen as merely the whines of helplessly ignorant slaves
who think they own the plantation they are peopled upon despite their obvious chains to it. Sadly,
the legal “Christian” church falls into the same category, serving up the false hope of pagan
divinity in false prophets. A slave goes to church. But a man of God is the church, his body the
temple, his mind the weapon, his soul Alive.

Or you can just poop on it all in the pure bliss of the arrogance of ignorance in mammon. It is your
choice. No one will force you to do anything against your will, for this is a foundational Law that
even they follow. And this fact is why the realization that our submission to them is a voluntary,
contractual, voidable relationship is so crucial to comprehend. And also that inversely, our relation-
ship to Jehovah is as permanent as Its Law, no matter what we do to pretend otherwise. For
Jehovah is (deÞned as) the very essence and Existence of all Life.

The point is that the legal codes only apply to persons (humans), not to men with visible blood.
Personhood is corruption of blood, a purely Þgurative term conÞrmed into a false reality by our
own actions therein, a spiritual death in civil (artiÞcial) life outside of God’s Nature and Law. Sadly,
the Þction and its purely humanistic system is much easier to follow than GodÕs Law, not in actual
practice but through the purposeful diversion and contracted lack of spiritual strength needed to
overcome its illusion, for satan (the adversary) appears as the false light even in its utter darkness.

!840
If this is still not clear, let us examine closer this word human, for we all id-entify ourselves by this
term of art.

Hu or Huwa is a name for god in SuÞsm. Literally, Arabic for ÒHe.Ó So hu-man can also refer to god-
man, as in self-idolatry. Of course a god-man is a creature of the mind, a mental imagery, a
phantom, a Þction that does not Exist in Reality. An idolatry of the self…

Examples illustrating that the word HU equates to the word ÒgodÓ include Allah HU Akbar, AHUd,
YaHUva (Jehovah/YHVH), YesHUa, HUda, AHUra Mazda, and HUman being (god-man being).

To be clear, Allah Hu is a reference to a god of suÞsm. To be hu-man is to be a man of the SuÞ way.
SuÞsm is the mystical tradition of Islam, involving mysticism and altered (unnatural) states of
consciousness. The SuÞ inßuence, importantly, was especially seen in the so-called 60Õs and 70Õs
Òdrug/love generation,Ó where the 13th century Mevlana OrderÕs ritual SuÞ dance of turning or
spinning in place around a central point (as a pillar of the earth) became popular amongst that
CIA-promoted drug culture and music scene. This was the adversarial, near-east counter-cultural
invasion into the Christian culture of America. This SuÞsm dance of the Òwhirling dervishesÓ came
crashing into American culture, riding the coat-tails of the New Age or One World ÒreligionÓ
movement that infested on a global scale music, art, cult-ure, opinions and lifestyles. This modern
Kabbalist cultural intrusion stems entirely within the realm of Jewish, cabalist (Babylonian)
mysticism and thought, turning the notion of the Christian Lifestyle and Law into what we see
today, often labeled as ÒJudeo-Christianity,Ó which is far more concerned with civil ethnicity,
symbology, mystery and ceremony than any expression of the teachings of christ (GodÕs Word/
Law). Popularized in the 1950s, Judeo-Christianity has certainly created a civil, secular-based
religion far from its spiritual purpose.

Inayat Kahn's SuÞsm was brought to America in the mid 19th century as ÒThe SuÞ Order of the
WestÓ by his son, Pir Vilayat Kahn, and by an American disciple, Sam Lewis (SuÞ Sam), the son of
Jewish parents. His father was vice president of Levi Strauss company and his mother was the
daughter of Lenore Rothschild of that House and international money-changer family of mammon.

In 1967, after a heart attack, Lewis publicly claimed to hear the voice of God say, "I make you
spiritual leader of the hippies.Ó He was recognized as the Zen master and SuÞ murshid (a senior
teacher), and founded an order of Christian mysticism called the Holy Order of Mans. He was a co-
pioneer of the ÒgreenÓ philosophy and false spirituality, a technocratic pre-cursor to the United
Nations ÒAgenda 21Ó plan of technocratically governed, global Òsustainability.Ó His role in the
CIAÕs Òcounter-cultureÓ scheme helped to spread hu-manism as LSD (a psychotic) and other drug-
induced ÒhippiesÓ slowly dispersed back across America as preachers of the hu-man way. Allah
means God. Adding Hu to Allah means God himself, or God present here. Thus hu-manism as a man-
as-his-own-god culture was instrumental in deconstructing the Christian culture that once
internalized God and institutionalized Its Law as Sovereign. Humanism, like any other false
religion, is in its essence counter-christian as a reference to the scriptural teachings. It is not Self-
Love under GodÕs Law, but God as Self (lawlessness before God).

SuÞ Sam died in 1971, only having taught three years in the Haight community of San Francisco,
but that community afterwards spread and thrived. Wali Ali Meyer, a Jewish Mississippian and
follower headed the cult after his death. SuÞsm has spread across America, disguised as ÒyogaÓ
and other forms of God-less meditations and cabalist teachings based on suÞsm. The symbolism that
represents suÞsm is the winged heart, now used many places, with the meaning of ßying to God
with an open heart, but more speciÞcally with being HU-man (unregenerate). The root of this
mystical teaching of SuÞsm is based on the SuÞ interpretation of the Islamic credo: La Ilaha El Allah
Hu. The traditional Moslem community popularly interprets this as a declaration of monotheism,
as "There is no God but Allah.Ó But the SuÞ doctrine hides this under the notion of absolute unity, as
"There is no reality but God." The now traditional SuÞ greeting is Ya Azim, meaning “How
wonderfully God manifests to me through you.Ó

!841
The reader should note the difference here from the christian man of (belonging to) God and the
SuÞ notion of man is God. The difference appears on the surface as a Þne line, but is indeed a deep
and dark chasm to fall into, a bottomless pit. It is the difference between I am (no thing) and I am
God. This Talmudic inßuence of Cabalistic thought was part of the Judiazing of Christian America
and of the institutions of modern, corporately denominated (in name only) Christianity. How many
times today do we hear the lie that Jesus was a ÒJew,Ó though that word never appeared in any of
the ÒoriginalÓ Bible language texts? A poor translation for Yĕhuwdiy (StrongÕs h3064), as a people
(tribe) eventually known as the Israelites (after the Restoration), from the Canaanite line of Judah,
Judah being a territory as well. Thus the notion of a Jehudite (i.e., Judaite or Jew), the modernly re-
invented secular (national) atheistic ÒJew,Ó whose civil law is the Babylonian Talmud without the
Torah, is that of what the Bible declares as the Synagogue of Satan, those who call themselves Jews
(as God-fearing Israelites) but are not, and whom are certainly adversarial to christ, as Òthe
opponents of our LordÓ (—Smith’s Bible Dictionary). But to be clear, the so-called ÒChristiansÓ of the
so-called ÒChristina nationsÓ are equally without scripture (the moral, New Law of christ) within
the civil law of nations, standing in a purely monetary, commercial intent while suckling the bosom
of mammon (the JewÕs favorite, usurious tool). Neither is following the calling of Jehovah, and
none of their leaders or peoples can therefore be called as the chosen of God. While the term ÒJewÓ
refers to nationality (ethnic identity), speciÞcally to distinguish the Jew from the Gentile, the name
of the Jew as a ÒHebrewÓ is confounded upon the Jew due to the language spoken (again, national
ethnicity), having nothing to do with the origin of that ancient religious culture or its law, and more
speciÞcally to distinguish the nationalistic identity of the Hebrew speaking Jew from the Hellenist
Ñ the Greek speaking Jew. The term Israelite, not to be confused with Israel (the illegal, so-called
corporate state), is referential to purely religious ÒIsraelitesÓ (People) that were called as the
ÒchosenÓ or ÒchoiceÓ people. This modernly twisted word comes from ἐκλεκτός eklektós; from
StrongÕs #G1586, which carries the meaning of the elect. Thus it is a word styled to kings, angels, the
ÒMessiah,Ó said to be the highest ofÞce appointed by God, and other high ofÞces of manÕs election.
More importantly, it is a word applied to Christians, as the Òchosen or electÓ of God, the best of
show, if you will, who obtain salvation through christ. The word elect is used twice as much as the
word chosen in the Bible, and generally refers to those appointed to ofÞces of high election, which
are said to be appointments by God. Thus we Þnd all throughout the Bible that the ÒelectÓ (eklektós -
chosen) shall be deceived. The modern Jewish people is certainly a deceived one, to say the least.
We also Þnd that Òmany will be called (#G2822 - klētos), but few chosen,Ó (Matthew 22:14). God
called the light Day and the darkness Night and the Þrmament Heaven, and he also calls all men to
Live spiritually, as Òto be invited (by God in the proclamation of the Gospel) to obtain eternal
salvation in the kingdom through Christ; called to (the discharge of) some ofÞce, as one divinely
selected and appointed.Ó All men, in other words, are called to follow the Law (Son/Word) of God,
while only the elect are chosen. Yet all men choose citizenship to the false gods of nations instead
(antichrist). There is no invitation by Jehovah to be bound as bondservants to artiÞcial persons
(corporations) that create their own law based on mammon in commerce and without the Word
(Law/Son) of God. God does not call on men to become the goyim (subjects) of legalized nations
and worldly things.

IÕd like to think, for instance, that I have been called to create this voluminous work, but I would
never seek to use such a spiritual gift and privilege of expressing the True and foundational Word
(Law) to my fellow man as an empty, chosen political title as the false Jews have in these modern
times, calling themselves the Òchosen peopleÓ without Law or works. To believe (love) this
Þgurative word chosen to be a literal one, this is the folly of man. It is the gateway of the ego, of
false gods. It is the cause of countless wars, ritualistic genocides, and the sacriÞcial spilt blood of
innocents, both man and animal. And it is the reason we are suffering the idea of a new and hope-
less world war between three apparently chosen but ultimately false, corporate state religious
ideals. In Truth, these are merely wars between three differing systems of manÕs legalistic law,
where the Law of Nature, of Jehovah, is cast aside for commerce in mammon. We suffer a war of
ethnicity, of language barriers kept Þrmly in place by the false elect (gods) of the nations.

!842
 —=—

“FOR WE DARE NOT MAKE OURSELVES OF THE NUMBER, or

compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: BUT THEY
MEASURING THEMSELVES BY THEMSELVES, AND COMPARING
THEMSELVES AMONG THEMSELVES, ARE NOT WISE.”
—2 Corinthians 10:12, KJB


—=—


SuÞsm of the West has spread all over the United States. When the ÒhippiesÓ left San Francisco and
the southern Laurel Canyon drug and music-based scene as that phase of the CIA controlled
counterculture ended, those who'd been affected by the inßuence of suÞsm (Taṣawwuf, Arabic:
‫)التصوف‬, which is deÞned as "Islamic mysticism,Ó or the inward dimension of Islam," took the
sacred (cursed) representational dances and meditative poses with them, under the rubric "Dances
of Universal Peace," and spread them back to their hometowns and country communes. Of course,
this inßuenced much of the Zionist Hollywood media machine, that holy grail of propaganda and
corruptive inßuence over entire generations. And by the 1980Õs yoga became all the rage, one of the
six major orthodox, metaphysical schools of Hinduism. Stemming from Sāmkhya, regarded as an
atheistic philosophy not based on reason by many scholars, Yoga at least espouses a Òpersonal godÓ
that lies as an inactive deity. The word samkhya means empirical or relating to numbers, or what is
called as metaphysical knowledge. But make no mistake that metaphysics is not spiritual in any
way, but merely a science of man.

METAPHYSICS - noun - s as z. [Gr. after, and physics. It is said that this name was given to
the science by Aristotle or his followers, who considered the science of natural bodies,
physics, as the Þrst in the order of studies, and the science of mind or intelligence to be the
second.] The science of the principles and causes of all things existing; hence, THE
SCIENCE OF MIND OR INTELLIGENCE. This science comprehends ontology, or the
science which treats of the nature, essence, and qualities or attributes of being; cosmology, the
science of the world, which treats of the nature and laws of matter and of motion;
anthroposophy, which treats of the power of man, and the motions by which life is produced;
psychology, which treats of the intellectual soul; pneumatology, or the science of spirits or
angels, etc. Metaphysical theology, called by Leibnitz and others theodicy, treats of the
existence of God, his essence and attributes. These divisions of the science of metaphysics
which prevailed in the ancient schools, are now not much regarded. The natural division of
things that exist is into body and mind, things material and immaterial. The former belong
to physics, and the latter to the science of metaphysics. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is hard sometimes to differentiate a science from a religious belief system. But if one may
contemplate a religion based purely on the science of information (useless knowledge), which
worships the knowledge of the purpose of all things in self-existence over the beauty and wonder
and right of that which is all in self-existence (God), then we may understand the metaphysical,
scientiÞc mind. Again, when spiritual Law and reasoning is removed from any aspect of Life, as the
protective Natural Law of self-Existence, then the purely unhindered, scientiÞc mind will literally
destroy Life in his attempt to discover its reason and source of Existence and ascertain Its Life-
force. And this state of mind may only appear when the knowledge of what God Is becomes
shattered, when one Living part of God is singled out (named) and removed from its consideration
and Truth of Being in self-existent as part of the whole, a part of the Oneness that is Jehovah. Only
the legally accepted, syndicalist (consensus based) classiÞcation and status systems created by men
and known only in the metaphysic realm of ÒscienceÓ may create such a destructive mentality,

!843
causing men to presume themselves as gods over lower Life-forms. Without the spiritual Law of
Nature, without consideration that all life is Sacred because all Life is a part of the Oneness of God,
the bodies that contain Life itself is instead under-stood by the purely scientiÞc (un-empathetic)
mind to be merely an empty vessel that must be destroyed in order to extract information. Not True
knowledge — just cold, hard, Lifeless data for the AI.

Here we arrive back at the idea of anarchy against God’s Natural Law. In this case, we have the
scientiÞc license to kill, maim, torture, and genetically alter GodÕs Design of Creation. He who
applies his employments and works towards the name (noun) of science is not doing so in the
name (verb) of Jehovah. This imperative by evil men in church and state to separate all Life and
Nature Itself from the concept of God is a necessary step in the institutional corruption of the
mind’s of men. For he who respects the very Oneness of all self-Existent Life and Nature as his God
(as Jehovah) and who thus follows the Law of that God would certainly never feign to have an
excuse (license) to arbitrarily destroy any part of God, any Life-form at all, in the name of manÕs
concept of the sciences and collection of information. The spiritual knowledge of what Life Is must
be deadened, the empathy towards all Life crushed, so that the empty, non-spiritual, unlawful,
informational awareness of what causes Life may be obtained through Its harm, alteration, and
destruction. This is legalized satanism Ñ the legal, forced classiÞcation of ÒlowerÓ Life detached
from Its Source, Its Oneness with God. And so in government, even man himself has been legally,
scientiÞcally classed as a lower-class Life-form without the protections of GodÕs Law of Nature.

In the scriptures, we Þnd our current state of decay from the moral, foundation Law of NatureÕs
God to be explained as exactly what transpired before the ßood, being as it was in the days of Noah.
In other words, Nature (God) caused all of his Creation (Life) to come back into harmony with
NatureÕs Design and Law, else it was Þguratively swept away by the great Òßood.Ó But like Jesus
the christos, Noah and his family virtually walked on the water, never sinking into the false gods and
legalisms of that day while in the uncorrupted vessel (body), mind and spirit of (at ÒrestÓ with)
God.

The symbol of the SuÞs is again the winged heart. SuÞsm, its Masters say, is not a way of the head
but of the heart. The way to ßy to God is to open the heart, to be human and to love and offer life in
service to God and to others in his place. In other words, as the ÔBrave New WorldÕ model suggests,
donÕt worry, be happy; use your heart only instead of your mind. Be non compos mentis! Accept
manÕs law (legalism = moral lawlessness) and its rulers (false gods).



I was surprised to be instructed by the scriptures to stand against what I now comprehend to be
utter nonsense, that our customary, cultural use and reference of this word heart as anything but a
bodily organ that pumps blood is oxymoronic at the least, as to think with or live by the heart. We
sometimes don’t realize how absurd our imaginary use of such words can be, even as they drive
our actions into self-oblivion. And, of course, the mind is the target of such foolery and logical
fallacy, for only the mind may guide us in reason, the heartbeat being literally an autonomic
response to Life Itself. And so in Truth, this concept of the heart is a completely sophist idea. Let us
see what really comes from the heart from the parabolic teachings of christ…

Ñ=Ñ

“And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? Do not ye yet
understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the
belly, and is cast out into the draught? But THOSE THINGS WHICH
PROCEED OUT OF THE MOUTH COME FORTH FROM THE HEART;
AND THEY DEFILE THE MAN. FOR OUT OF THE HEART PROCEED
EVIL THOUGHTS, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false

!844
 witness, blasphemies: THESE ARE THE THINGS WHICH DEFILE A
MAN: but to eat with unwashen hands deÞleth not a man.Ó
—Matthew 15, 16-20, KJB

—=—

The moral Law of God comes not from the heart, but from the reasonable, spiritually driven mind.
The mind controls the heart lest the passions of the heart take control of the mind. The heart is the
animal (soulless) and anarchic (lawless) nature of the hu-man. And so it is quite logical that the
elect, the powers that be, would seek its subjects to live illiterately by their hearts, and to cause this
completely irrational concept to become a vulgar mainstay in the dog-Latin mentality of their
common, subjected and mentally enslaved goy. For what is it to have a Pure heart but to have a
strong mind controlling ones passions (Þgurative emotions of the heart) under the Law of GodÕs
Nature? Remember, there is no heart. ItÕs just a Þctional word, a noun (name) created in the
imaginations of men.

There is no spoon…

And just where is it that you think the “love of money” comes from… the heart or the mind? The
answer to this question is easily answered by simply examining what it is that most people spend
their money on. He with a strong heart will do well in the simulation of The Matrix, for no Self-
control is required, and there is no True Freedom to Þght for. There is no God, for The Matrix is a
god, and all plugged in to it are agenticly giving that god its life in false-existence (power), for the
mind is corrupted in lieu of the delusions and passions of the heart.

And thatÕs how we got into this modern mess, for the former hippies now wear suits and ties, are
responsible for not cleaning up oil spills and all forms of pollution, are governmental, legal law-
makers, and teach with tenure in syndicalist universities that guide and license the hearts over the
minds of future offenders of Nature and Its Law! The scriptures tout knowledge above all else, not
blind ÔCalifornia DreamingÕ as mere SuÞst HU-mans. Similitude is not sameness! Modern
Christianity is but a simulacrum, a copy without any origin. Think about that next time the hippies
whip out and play their guitars as copyrighted “Christian music” on the alter of your own
incorporate church, for they may know not what it is they do and where that idea came from, nor
its origin of intent as an obfuscation of spirituality, knowledge, custom, tradition, and Law. The
counter-culture is everywhere, powered mostly by useful innocents that have been tricked into
abandoning all the foundations of Law and Natural reasoning.



But there is that remnant spoken of prophecy; those whose minds are too strong to live without
consciousness in such a delusion. I know you are out there… and you know on a deep, inexplicable
level exactly what you are. For you yearn to be illegal so that you may act by the Law of your
Nature!

—=—

“And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went TO MAKE WAR
WITH THE REMNANT OF HER SEED, WHICH KEEP THE
COMMANDMENTS OF GOD, AND HAVE THE TESTIMONY OF
JESUS CHRIST.Ó
—Revelation 12:17, KJB

—=—

!845
Do not hesitate, and be not confused, for you already know exactly what the dragon is. The dragon
is just an anthropomorphized representation of that which is every aspect of satan, of what is
generally manifested through the agents of church and state (a conspiracy of false doctrine) which
are your adversaries (from Strong's #G1404 - δράκων, drakōn), the haters of Truth (God).

HU-man rights campaigns of the past and present stem from this cultural subversion of SuÞsm
(humanism). For without God in the way, all things against God’s Creation seem possible. The man
as god philosophy makes all of man’s actions godly, exhibiting a sovereignty that knows no higher
law than himself. And virtually ever commercial we see exclaims the virtu of breaking all limits
and rules. Cause that’s so damned cool.

This is not in harmony with the teachings of the scriptural christ, nor is the fact that the secular
religions are using the name of God in promotion of adultery, money, and suÞsm. In other words,
this SuÞ, humanistic way is certainly not the self-evident Truth of NatureÕs Law. ItÕs a schema
purely of manÕs design. ItÕs just another false doctrine without self evidence in Nature.

Part of this subversion of spirituality is the promoted legal concept of human rights. For in order to
qualify for the rights afforded to the lowest form of man without substance, the human animal, all
spiritual considerations must be removed so that only the animal (hu-man) is left. The rights of
animals in human form need not be in accordance with the spiritual, moral Law of God, only
similar to those rules for which a master might treat his slave, a farmer his cattle.

A “right” only exists where Þctional names and thus classes and titles exist, for a right is always
positively bestowed upon the legal (false) title or status of a Þctional persona, and never upon a
man in his True spirit. If all Life (including animal and all supposedly ÒlowerÓ Life) were held
equally and unconditionally sacred, no man could be treated as merely human (animal) by other
men, for that would be against the negative duty of the Natural Law. Status is only ever a legal
form, that which is opposed to GodÕs Nature of Creation. The only status of man in the eyes of God
is that of a Living, sentient Being (verb), which is legally invisible (negative) and immune (not
attachable or contractable) to any legal law or term of art, as the perfection of God’s Creation.
Nature attributes no class or status to any man, for these are only the creations of manÕs own mind.
No one is born a king, and yet equitably speaking every man is. Therefore no man can be a king
over other men without consent in abandoning oneÕs very own Nature and Right of self-Existence
under God. Any rights attributed to man are merely negative in Nature, meaning only that manÕs
positive laws cannot effect a man of God without his contractual consent to alienate himself via
bestowed and accepted human (civil) “rights.” A legal title may only exist upon a legal, Þctional
name (property) and nowhere else. To claim God as a Source of negative rights is really just the act
of not claiming any man or person as one’s pretended (legal) source of positive rights under
positive law. To have what are named as “God-given rights” one must follow God’s law and never
entangle himself or join in man’s secular, public world of positive government. Positive means
legal. Negative means spiritual. Man must never allow word DNA to be twisted into and enjoined
with his own body as GodÕs Creation. If you are claiming your rights from an established, Þctional
government, ideal, movement, or incorporated religion of the state, then in Reality, in Nature and
under God you simply have none — only legal (anti-God) rights on paper and in name only. You
only have a lie and the right to be a liar in order to legally harm others.

If you beLIEve they exist, then you live in the lie. Legal existence is the lie. It is satan. And it can only
exist in man’s mind. Thus man is his own worst enemy. We must know our Self to know our enemy.

There is no spoon because “spoon” is only a word of art describing a form of something Real and
knowable through the senses (tangible). ÒSpoonÓ is an intangible, Þctional name that has legal
“standing” only in legal law jurisdictions (the legal matrix) as a re-presentational, empty form of
something Real and tangible (with substance). It stands (has standing and consideration) in name
(as a Þctional character or prop) only. Thus a ÒspoonÓ can never be found in Nature. It exists as
word magic only. It lies only in legal title, a strand of word-DNA. The hunk of metal or other real
material that makes up the substance of what is called a ÒspoonÓ Exists in Nature despite what it is

!846
named, as does man. Only the name gives it a status or authority. And the law of man prevents the
ÒspoonÓ as a representation of the Real from being bent. The Þction thus controls the actual
qualities of the Real. The word (art form) is made to magically control its Source (substance in
Reality).

God has a similar characteristic. Names cannot deÞne or redeÞne what Jehovah (verb) Is, for if such
an entity as God Exists, then “GodÓ is merely a descriptive word to re-present what that
unfathomable, unintelligible, Sovereign Entity actually Is in Reality and to the senses. Thus any
legal or ecclesiastical deÞnition of ÒGodÓ or of anything actually in GodÕs Creation of Nature should
never be taken as anything but an opposition to God and Nature. The name is not the Reality. Man
must represent himself as a legal god (artiÞcial person/corporate CEO) to rule despite God. And so
the word ÒGodÓ as used in this work should be considered as such, as the difference (opposing
forces) between the Reality of and in Nature (tangible, sensible) and the lies of legal existence in the
cartoon world of legal Þction, and nothing more or less. The readerÕs own religious beliefs are oneÕs
own, and do not pertain to this work other than to say that citizen-ships cannot have two masters
any more than men of God can. God or mammonÉ This choice always abounds. One either Lives
in oneÕs Faith (Trust) of Reality or lives in false faith (contracted dis-ease) to government and its
idols in the Þction of believed in (loved), conÞrmed lies.

—=—

“The law immutable, indestructible, eternal, not like those of today and
yesterday, but made ere time began.”
—Sophocles

—=—

Perhaps this comprehension of the negative (Eternal) substance of God and of Creation (including
man) can be better revealed to the reader in other terms. Only things that have been specially de-
Þned can be considered as legal Òthings.Ó Something must be deÞned and named for it to have a
legal existence. When man is re-deÞned as a HU-man or as a person (legal status), he then inherits
with that description a positive legal existence, a false image. At this point man can be seen in the
legal realm because of his legal description (his persona). When God that Eternal and all things as
One in Nature is deÞned and named by governments and religious doctrines, the same
phenomenon takes place, where the God of Nature becomes instead a false legal consideration.
God is personiÞed; anthropomorphized; humanized; legalized. Since legal things cannot
acknowledge the Real God (all that IS) as their Creator, the legal and ecclesiastical Þctions must re-
deÞne God into legal terms. Thus men may inherit the qualities and empty character (mask) of God
through legal means, claiming to be re-deÞned gods over any re-deÞned men in persona that
accept the legal Þction and its authorities as their own deÞned gods. Only one of these gods can be
invoked at one time, spiritually or secularly. Thus the scriptural notion that one cannot have two
masters always applies. Once a man allows himself to become a legal entity, he necessarily accepts
a legal master, having broken the foundational (Natural) Law. He not only accepts mammon
(money) as his god, of which all things are thus valued (ßooded) in despite their actual Nature, but
in Þction becomes the collateral for that money, being himself valued according to the worth of his
labor and offspring in personhood. A person of money (mammon) is not and cannot be a man of
God. A person cannot Live in the kingdom of GodÕs Nature, for a person is literally made of money
(nothingness).

Just as God is known to be the Permanence of All that Is in Being (verb), the legal gods must re-
deÞne all of that Being so as to determine the big lie as the permanent legal law. The Þxed
establishment of manÕs government does not exist without its own post-Creation description, its
deÞnite terms of art, and its ratiÞed determination as Òtruth.Ó The lie only exists according to the
words that deÞne it.

!847
 DEFINE - verb transitive - [Latin To end, to limit, from Þnis, end.] 1. To determine or describe
THE END OR LIMIT; as, TO DEFINE THE EXTENT OF A KINGDOM OR COUNTRY. 2.
To determine with precision; to ascertain; as, to deÞne the limits of a kingdom. 3. TO MARK
the limit; to circumscribe; TO BOUND. 4. To determine or ascertain THE EXTENT OF THE
MEANING OF A WORD; to ascertain the signiÞcation of a term; TO EXPLAIN WHAT A
WORD IS UNDERSTOOD TO EXPRESS; as, to deÞne the words, virtue, courage, belief, or
charity. 5. To describe; to ascertain or explain the distinctive properties or circumstances of a
thing; as, to deÞne a line or an angle. - verb intransitive - To determine; to decide. (Webs1828)

DETERMINE - verb transitive - [Latin, to bound; a boundary or limit. Gr. See Term.] 1. To end;
particularly, to end by the decision or conclusion of a cause, or of a doubtful or controverted
point; applicable to the DECISIONS OF THE MIND, OR TO JUDICIAL DECISIONS. We
say, I had determined this question in my own mind; the court has determined the cause. 2.
To END and FIX; TO SETTLE ULTIMATELY; as, THIS EVENT DETERMINED HIS FATE. 3.
To Þx on; TO SETTLE OR ESTABLISH; as, to determine the proper season for planting seeds.
God--hath determined the times before appointed. Acts 17:26. 4. TO END; TO LIMIT; TO
BOUND; TO CONFINE. Yonder hill determines our view. Knowledge is determined by the
sight. 5. To give a direction to; TO INFLUENCE THE CHOICE; that is, TO LIMIT TO A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR DIRECTION; as, this circumstance determined him to the
study of law. Also, to give a direction to material bodies IN THEIR COURSE; as, impulse
may determine a moving body to this or that point. 6. To resolve, that is, to end or settle a
point IN THE MIND, as in deÞnition Þrst. I determined this with myself. 2 Corinthians 2:1.
Paul had determined to sail by Ephesus. Acts 20:16. 7. TO DESTROY. [Not used.] 8. To put an
end to; as, TO DETERMINE A WILL. 9. To settle or ascertain, as something uncertain. THE
CHARACTER OF THE SOUL IS DETERMINED BY THE CHARACTER OF ITS GOD…
(Webs1828)

DESCRIBE - verb transitive - [Latin To write.] 1. To delineate or MARK the FORM or

FIGURE; as, to describe a circle by the compasses. 2. To make or exhibit a Þgure by motion; as,
a star describes a circle or an ellipsis in the heavens. 3. TO SHOW OR REPRESENT TO
OTHERS IN WORDS; TO COMMUNICATE THE RESEMBLANCE OF A THING, BY
NAMING ITS NATURE, FORM OR PROPERTIES. The poet describes the Trojan horse. The
historian describes the battle of Pharsalia. The moralist describes the effects of corrupt
manners. The geographer describes countries and cities. 4. TO REPRESENT BY SIGNS. A
deaf and dumb man may describe a distant object. Our passions may be described by external
motions. 5. To draw a plan; TO REPRESENT by lines and other MARKS on paper, or other
material; as, to describe the surface of the earth by a map or chart. 6. To deÞne laxly.
(Webs1828)

—=—

The character of the soul is determined by the character of its god/God. Do not proceed with this work
until that really sinks in and this distinctive opposition between the gods of legal Þction and GodÕs
Creation of Nature is clear. For this is the foundation of all Law. This is God or mammon. This is
Nature or Þction. This is everything…

A Free man in Nature can only be said to be one that has no legal existence, no name, no persona, no
determined status, no description or deÞnition, and no Þxed determination (course) set merely by
manÕs law. Only when the legal authority cannot recognize the man as a person (legal status/
property) can the man be Free and clear of the legal authority. Legal eyes cannot see or respect non-
legal things. The dead cannot control the Living without our consent. ArtiÞce cannot consider the
unwilling soul. But a Truly Free man will never remain Truly Free unless his God is declared, not
merely by his words, but by his actions and total lack of participation in legal things. A legally free
(enfranchised) man without God is only a hu-man. And human animals will be tamed and made
beasts of burden like all others that roam freely (in franchise) between fences (borders), for the legal
realm must have proof of manÕs intentions as its limitation.

!848
GodÕs Creation must be re-deÞned, described, humanized, incorporated, registered, and thus
determined to be evil (legal) entities by the governments of men in order to be controlled and
dominated by those men acting as false gods. All things must be named (put into noun form) and
thus cursed (made insubstantial) by the artful words of personiÞcation held sacred above Reality.

If I name my spoon a fork, is the name any more or less a false re-presentation of the actual, tangible
metal object I eat with?

In Reality, noÉ Nothing in Nature has actually changed.

But what about in the Þction? Has it changed?

The mind-bending answer to this question is yesÉ or no. For the gods make the rules of their own
deÞned terms (property), and only the words exist in that Þction; a matrix code. A lie cannot be in
Reality harmed in any way. It is not a permanent Þxture. Its false nature cannot be harnessed or
sensed in Reality. The legal Þction, remember, is made up only of speciÞcally deÞned words. The
name re-presents the object as a speciÞcally described Þction. The name is always a lie. So govern-
ment can change words and their meanings any time it wishes, for they have no actual attachment
to Real things. They can re-name anything at anytime, but nothing in Reality will ever change. The
Real is not altered in any way by this act of a legal name-change except in the Þctional realm. Each
word creates a unique legal construct that does not Exist in Reality, so Reality has no bearing on the
meaning or purpose of any word.

The deÞned word itself cannot be physically bent like the actual piece of metal can. But amazingly,
through the power of govern-ment (mind control), if the legal law states a rule that it is illegal to
bend a Òspoon,Ó man acting in legal personhood may mistake that law as a Law of Nature (of God),
beLIEving that the spoon cannot actually be bent because it would be against the legalistic (false)
law, even if its bending would somehow beneÞt man. While a word can be re-deÞned and re-
spelled in disillusionment, it can never actually Exist tangibly in Nature.

But there are consequences. Words can effect Nature with their power over the mind, will, and thus
actions of men under the enchantment of their spelling and determination. Legality and person-
hood then is the opposite of self-determination in Free will. For under this law of men, we believe
in the intangible and invisible chains upon our wrists and throats that cannot be broken, for an
established, pre-deÞned, ofÞcial word cannot be broken, and a law of artful words respected with-
out soul and spirit (Source) is an unbreakable, circular DNA chain. The jurisdiction wherein those
words have anchor and artiÞcially exist, within those nations of the idolatrous magistracy; this is
the realm that must be abjured (abandoned/quitclaimed). For heaven sits beneath all of manÕs
designs, waiting to be rediscovered by the misled victims of that false legalist dialectic. And to be a
part of that Utopia (nowhere) we must Be no thing and no person, Existing in no place. To Exist in
the ambiguity of Nature we must become ambiguous once again. We must be reborn into our
original Nature, respect utterly and without exception its laws and design of self-existence, and
follow only Its self-evident Natural Law.

By renaming what we call as the spoon into a Òfork,Ó has its Nature and Design in Reality changed?
Is it less usable as a commodity? Has the mineral content or shape of those compounds actually
been altered by its re-naming?

No, of course not. The name is just a Þction. But the perception, the reputation, and the
characteristics are altered in manÕs mind. Its legal quality and consideration has thus been changed,
just like a manÕs Natural quality, standing, and consideration does when he becomes enjoined to a
strawman person in the volunteerism of contractual bond and surety. The spoon could be renamed
as a Òweapon,Ó which in turn can cause a person to be named by the opinion of court as a
ÒcriminalÓ in its utility and use.

Government subsists (exists as a lie) because we believe that the personiÞcation of that Þction
(words on paper) somehow actually Exists in Reality, as part of Reality, and is the men that

!849
incorporate within the Þction. You may, for instance, still be afraid of the last Þctional monster you
read about in some Stephen King tale, while simultaneously knowing in your mind that ÒITÓ (the
freaky mutant alien killer clown) doesnÕt actually Exist in Nature (Reality). IT is purely a Þction of the
mind. Yet so are ÒpoliceÓ and Òmilitary ofÞcers.Ó The mind makes it seem Real, and we form a re-
presentation of Its description in our minds, causing us to turn on extra lights just to make sure
those descriptive words created no actual substance hiding (lying) in the closet. Words (names)
may re-create the form and description of Reality in the Þction, but words can never create Its actual
substance. The man that believes in (loves) his own ßattering, ofÞcial title is often quite willing to
harm or kill to protect its Þctional creator (legal gods).

Words must be acted out by agents, and these act-ions are deÞned by created words. A ÒmurdererÓ
only exists when a man acts without license to kill, a purely false and de-scriptive word, and the
persona (property) is so charged with that Þctional crime, though no actual Life Exists in the legal
realm. Law is but pre-ordained, positively enforced action and inaction upon the actors of legal
words, names, and titles. Nature is the negative, random act of Life without deÞnition, description,
or determination by manÕs law, Existing without and despite being simultaneously, magi-cally
spelled into legal existence. The two realmsÉ Nature has no legal standing simply because it is not
made or Designed by the words and inventions of man. (Created) Thus legal words allow and
invite the disruption of NatureÕs processes through the deÞned, limited, and often forced actions of
actors. In this regard, Nature is rendered defenseless, for man is supposed to be its defender,
steward, and guardian. How can manÕs purpose reasonably (Naturally) be conceived of any other
way than this? The Laws of Nature must be re-deÞned if the laws of Þction are to control Nature
and manÕs place within such an artiÞcial construct. This is satanism, or that which is adversarial to
GodÕs Nature and Law. There is no mystery behind this word satan but what man recreates in his
false doctrines and images of religion.

Before a legal actor (agent of the strawman) can legally bend a Òspoon,Ó the establishment of that
artiÞcial word ÒspoonÓ upon the Real substantive object in Nature to be bent must be ordained with
that Þctional title in admixture. In the end, the legal authority that governs words through con-
trolling the mind (govern-ment) may only administer the laws over its own creation (terms/
names), under its own law (words in nomenclature), and as its own word-title of Òspoon.Ó Yet it
has no authority over the substance of the actual metal object unless that authority is believed in
(loved) and respected as truth in the false reality of menÕs legalistic inventions (deceptions).

RESPECT - verb transitive - [Latin respecto, or respectus, from respicio; re and specio, to view.] 1.
To regard; TO HAVE REGARD TO IN DESIGN OR PURPOSE. In orchards and gardens, we
do not so much respect beauty, as variety of ground for fruits, trees and herbs. 2. To have
regard to, in relation or connection; TO RELATE TO. The treaty particularly respects our
commerce. 3. To view or consider with some DEGREE OF REVERENCE; to esteem as
POSSESSED OF REAL WORTH. I always loved and respected Sir William. 4. To look
towards. Palladius adviseth the front of his house should so respect the south. [Not in use.] TO
RESPECT THE PERSON, TO SUFFER THE OPINION OR JUDGMENT TO BE
INFLUENCED OR BIASED BY A REGARD TO THE OUTWARD CIRCUMSTANCES OF A
PERSON, TO THE PREJUDICE OF RIGHT AND EQUITY. Thou shalt not respect the
person of the poor. Leviticus 19:15. NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON. 2
Samuel 14:14. - noun - [Latin respectus.] 1. Regard; attention. 2. That ESTIMATION OR
HONOR in which men hold the distinguished worth or substantial good qualities of others.
It expresses less than reverence and veneration, which regard elders and superiors; whereas
respect may regard juniors and inferiors. Respect regards the QUALITIES OF THE MIND, or
the actions which CHARACTERIZE those qualities. Seen without awe, and serv'd without
respect. 3. That deportment or course of action which proceeds from esteem; regard; due
attention; as, TO TREAT A PERSON WITH RESPECT. These same men treat the sabbath
with little respect. 4. Good will; favor. The Lord had respect to Abel and his offering. Genesis
4:4. 5. Partial regard; UNDUE BIAS TO THE PREJUDICE OF JUSTICE; AS THE PHRASE,
RESPECT OF PERSONS. 1 Peter 1:17. James 2:1. Proverbs 24:23. 6. RESPECTED
CHARACTER; as persons of the best respect in Rome. 7. Consideration; MOTIVE in

!850
 reference to something. Whatever secret respects were likely to move them. 8. Relation;
regard; reference; followed by of, but more properly by to. They believed but one Supreme
Deity, which, with respect to the beneÞts men received from him, had several titles.
(Webs1828)

—=—

God does not respect persons. God does not respect Þction. God does not respect lies. No
personiÞcation is of God. There are no persons in GodÕs Nature.

The actor (man in persona) must be made to beLIEve (love) whole-heartedly in his lines (coded
legal words) for the legal authority of that Þctional law of words to apply to him. As the Holly-
wood star, all legal persons are professional liars — self-deceivers. The actor must never be told
that all the world is a stage, for if he knew, he could control and avoid the matrix code that is manÕs
legal law. He could defeat all evil. He could bend the spoon because there is no ÒspoonÓ in Reality,
existing only as an intangible, non-authoritative name (noun) with no referential to Nature or its
Laws. ÒSpoonÓ is a lie, as all words and names are. Without artiÞce, man could re-deÞne terms to
reference only the Truth in ambiguity, without authority or false (written) law. Or he may cease to
use words and names altogether if he so chose, that he might ensure his relationship to God and
Nature is never tainted, as with a vow of silence. The actor would realize that he didnÕt need to
bend the rules, for in Reality there are no rules. Rules are merely Þctional words stemming from the
i-magi-nation. There are no words. There are no titles. There is only self-evident Truth.

There are no rules because there are no wordsÉ because there is no Òspoon.Ó We only put
quotations around names and titles so that they seem authoritatively Real.

Likewise, the imaginary monster (government) can only lawfully harm you if you believe it has the
right and authority to do so, because you believe you are its strawman (property), its legal
registered name. And its harm of other foreign peoples around the world also stems from your
lying by in silence while it militarily and unlawfully conquers and kills in the artiÞce and protection
of your name. For government can only legally harm the legal persona it has created by surname,
title, and status, not the man. It therefore labels all peoples of the world as potential or active
ÒterroristsÓ and Òenemies of the stateÓ instead of as Living men of God, and therefore creates a
speciÞcally deÞned legal Þction that government then claims authority over so as to have the
ability to break GodÕs Commandments. It assigns a pretended determination (course) by naming.
Government destroys only what it creates and thus what is bound to that creation in surety and
under the law of nations — the legal status of every thing and every one. It pretends that man,
while acting in a legal Þctional capacity (in person), is not responsible for his own actionsÉ as if his
soul is somehow hidden from God. It relies on manÕs belief in (love of) the lie that man is in fact the
strawman (name and title) to literally get away with murdering other men under the legal name
and status of that other Þctional persona. Without this false religious belief by man in Þction,
government would have no lawful power or authority under its own maximÕs of law. At this point,
the True nature of government would be revealed (disclosed), as the military would be called out to
quell the disbelief in the civil authority of the Þctional government. This would be called
revelation, apocalypse, words which merely mean dis-closure of knowledge. Things would
become quite uncivilized to say the least. In the end, government is only as powerful as the
ignorance of the men in its police and military force, manifesting governmentÕs (an artiÞcial
personÕs) will in the chaotic brute strength that culminates from their own collective false belief in
(love of) the lie that they have some permissive, lawful authority (under a false god) over other
men because of some shiny badges and supposed legal status. Being possessed and mesmerized by
a projected self-image in the pretended alter-ego of personhood; this is the citizen soldier; the
patriot. In this way, the law is like the image of the Ouroboros - popularly known as Òthe serpent
eating its own tail.Ó But it is not after all just vulgarly devouring itself, it is instead magically
(through word spelling) speaking itself into a constantly new and false existence through its
devilishly forked tongue, continuously re-inventing itself just as government does.

!851
 —=—

“Language is the dress of thought.”

—Samuel Johnson

—=—

“Language is the most imperfect and expensive means yet discovered

for communicating thought.”
—William James

—=—



“Language forces us to perceive the world as man presents it to us.”

—Julia Penelope

—=—

“Words signify man's refusal to accept the world as it is.”

—Walter Kaufmann

—=—

“Thanks to words, we have been able to rise above the brutes; and
thanks to words, we have often sunk to the level of the demons.”
—Aldous Huxley

—=—

“We should have a great fewer disputes in the world if words were
taken for what they are, the signs of our ideas only, and not for things
themselves.”
—John Locke

—=—

“No one means all he says, and yet very few say all they mean, for
words are slippery and thought is viscous.”
—Henry Brooks Adams, The Education of Henry Adams, 1907

—=—

“What words say does not last. The words last. Because words are
always the same, and what they say is never the same.”
—Antonio Porchia, Voces, 1943, translated from Spanish by W.S. Merwin

—=—

!852
 —=—

“He hath studied her will, and translated her will, out of honesty into
English.”
—William Shakespeare, Merry Wives of Windsor [I, 3, Pistol]

—=—

“True translation is transparent: it does not obscure the original, does

not stand in its light, but rather allows pure language, as if strengthened
by its own medium, to shine even more fully on the original.”
—Walter Benjamin


—=—

ÒAny man who does not make himself proÞcient in at least two
languages other than his own is a fool. Such men have the quaint habit
of discovering things Þfty years after all the world knows about them Ñ
because they read only their own language.”
—Martin H. Fischer (1879–1962)

—=—

“He who does not know foreign languages does not know anything
about his own.”
—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Kunst and Alterthum

—=—

“If the English language made any sense, lackadaisical would have
something to do with a shortage of ßowers.”
—Doug Larson

—=—

“Old words are reborn with new faces.”

—Terri Guillemets

—=—

“A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged, it is the skin of a

living thought and may vary greatly in color and content according to
the circumstances and the time in which it is used.”
—Oliver Wendell Holmes

—=—

!853
 —=—

“Be not the slave of Words…"

—Thomas Carlyle,’Sartor Resartus: The Life and Opinions of Herr Teufelsdröckh,’ 1831

—=—

Do not be confused or confounded by this word/title of “foreign.” No man is foreign to or outside

of God’s Nature. This is an impossibility. There are no aliens in the universe, in the Oneness of all
Existence. Foreign is merely a term of the legal artiÞce, of scientiÞc and artful labeling, and it only
refers to legal personas (Þctions/creations of law) in other cartoon jurisdictions. Foreign is not to be
Naturally Free, but to be bound in citizenship to another principal corporation (nation). As a public
person of the United States (district) in any foreign (private) State of the union, you are a foreigner
acting in agency with government within a US citizen-ship or through another nationÕs ethnic
(worded) status. ThatÕs what a person (status) is. Something foreign cannot exist unless a group of
men can be convinced that a nation or country (district) Þrst exists, and that participation in that
Þction makes them not foreign to it. This is the game of nations, the game of thrones. Lies and
propaganda. To any nation, all other published (public) members of all other nations have no blood
to protect them, and are merely goyim (chattel) birthed ripe for slaughter.

FOREIGN - adjective - forÕan. [Latin foris, foras.] 1. BELONGING TO ANOTHER NATION

OR COUNTRY; ALIEN; NOT OF THE COUNTRY IN WHICH ONE RESIDES; extraneous.
We call every country foreign which is not within the jurisdiction of our own government.
In this sense, Scotland before the union was foreign to England, and Canada is now foreign to
the United States. More generally foreign is applied to countries more remote than an adjacent
territory; as a foreign market; a foreign prince. IN THE UNITED STATES, ALL TRANS-
ATLANTIC COUNTRIES ARE FOREIGN. 2. PRODUCED IN A DISTANT COUNTRY OR
JURISDICTION; coming from another country; as foreign goods; goods of foreign
manufacture; a foreign minister. 3. Remote; NOT BELONGING; not connected; with to or
from. You dissemble; the sentiments you express are foreign to your heart. This design is
foreign from my thoughts. [The use of from is preferable and best authorized.] 4. Impertinent;
not pertaining; not to the purpose. The observation is foreign from the subject under
consideration. 5. EXCLUDED; NOT ADMITTED; held at a distance. 6. Extraneous;
adventitious; NOT NATIVE OR NATURAL. 7. In law, a foreign attachment is an attachment
of the goods of a foreigner within a city or liberty, for the satisfaction of a debt due from the
foreigner to a citizen; or an attachment of the money or goods of a debtor, in the hands of
another person. A foreign bill of exchange, is a bill drawn by a person in one country, on his
correspondent or AGENT in another, as distinguished from an inland bill, which is drawn
by one person or another in the same jurisdiction or country. Foreign plea, a plea or
objection to a judge as incompetent to try the question, on the ground that it is not within
his jurisdiction. (Webs1828)

ETHNIC - noun - A heathen; A PAGAN. (Webs1828)

ETHNICISM - noun - Heathenism; PAGANISM; IDOLATRY. (Webs1828)

ETHNICAL - adjective - [Latin ethnicus; Gr. from NATION from the root of G. heide, heath,
woods, whence heathen. See Heathen.] Heathen; PAGAN; PERTAINING TO THE
GENTILES OR NATIONS NOT CONVERTED TO CHRISTIANITY; OPPOSED TO
JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN. (Webs1828)

HEATHEN - noun - [Gr. from heath, that is, one who lives in the country or woods, as pagan
from pagus, a village.] 1. A PAGAN; A GENTILE; ONE WHO WORSHIPS IDOLS, or is
unacquainted with the true God. In the Scriptures, the word seems to comprehend ALL

!854
 NATIONS EXCEPT THE JEWS OR ISRAELITES, as they were ALL STRANGERS TO THE
TRUE RELIGION, AND ALL ADDICTED TO IDOLATRY. The word may now be applied
perhaps to ALL NATIONS, except to Christians and Mohammedans. Heathen, without the
plural termination, is used plurally or COLLECTIVELY, FOR GENTILES OR HEATHEN
NATIONS. Ask of me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance. Psalms 2:8.
Heathen, however, has a plural, expressing two or more individuals. If men have reason to be
heathens in Japan— The precepts and examples of the ancient heathens. 2. A RUDE,
ILLITERATE, BARBAROUS PERSON. - adjective - Gentile, pagan; as a heathen author.
(Webs1828)

—=—

The legal presumption that all men agenticly living under the protections of other nations are acting
as Þctional persons with allegiance to that particular nation makes all men ethnocentric foreigners
(heathens), and so the presumption of law creates legal authority to destroy the person (reputation)
that belongs to the ÒforeignÓ nation. The Living man each foreigner (person) lies Þctionally
attached to may only be considered as collateral damage in surety. But the actual Life, the Creation
of God, is not considered in war, only its status (persona) as a statistic, a numbered and tagged
beast of burden. All pawns look alike. And all pawns are treated as pawns, like game-pieces on a
game-board. These are wars on titles and status, for all citizens are agents of govern-ment, in
support of the state. To governments, men are only Þctional pegs on a game board, clothed (uni-
formed) with artiÞcial corporate persons (targets) and moved about like avatars. For in Reality
there is no country to attack, only the men contained and indebted within claiming allegiance and
ethnicity by that false idol (paganism) and ßag (bloodless Arms).

As we have learned, the foreign status of US citizenships in each individual (private) State and
under their commercial state governments, a status that is unknown to the majority of the
population that worship their own lowest of possible statuses in public while falsely beLIEving
themselves to be the free “American” People of each private State, is only that of a foreigner
licensed to commercially reside in that foreign legal state. So the paper person created by the
United States resides only in the Þling cabinet of the foreign state, which is but another corporation
on paper.

You might wonder then how a man acting in persona under government as a common citizen may
be charged by government for the murder of another man. But this is not how Þction works, for
Þction only deals with the already legally dead (acts of the state), unable to consider Life (as an Act
of God). The man acting in agency as a citizen does not kill another man, he prematurely executes
the contract of another HU-man citizen. In other words, he disrupts the commercial capacity of
government property (the Þctional person). By this legal act named as Òmurder,Ó his strawman
(property) has disturbed the commercial potential of another government strawman (property).
And so government places the “murderer” as surety into custody in order to pay for his sin against
his principal, which is a valuable consideration that is paid for with his time and future labor
potential while incarcerated to match the lost potential of the other now defunct commercial person
of government. In other words, the crime is not the loss of actual Life, but the loss of the force of
Life that puppeteers the Þctional persona (status) in commerce. For when the Real man dies, so too
does the ability of his assigned persona to act as a subject in agency. All crime in Þction is only ever
Þnancial. A price is placed upon every crime, and the payment is with time. Currency represents
merely the time and labor of others, past and future. So one either pays for his crimes with his own
time and labor while imprisoned, or he does so with the cash money (mammon) that represents
someone else’s time and labor value. This is how the wealthy stay out of jail. They pay for their
crimes with legal tender. Only the poor labor to pay with their imprisoned bodies in surety. Prison
is for debtors that have no credit. But then, so is citizenship — an open-air prison legally called hell,
incorporated for the purpose of paying the national debt through capitalism, otherwise known as
human trafÞcking.

!855
Only if government is made into a false creator god can government (an artiÞcial person) claim the
right as god to harm its own creation (of words). It is our voluntary bond to that creation (straw-
man) that makes us the bearer of that harm in a state of surety. We stand for, as, and in their
proprietary Þctional character. For the law sees no immortal man of God, only his mortal (dead),
Þctional, corporate person. These terms mortal and immortal will be expounded upon later in this
work.

And how does the government god create? It forges letters as raw materials into the DNA of words
and phrases, like a blacksmith forges weapons from iron, creating the legal names of all Living and
non-Living things so as to forge them into Þctional, imaginary forms of their real substanceÉ

FORGE - To fabricate, construct, or prepare one thing IN IMITATION OF ANOTHER THING,

WITH THE INTENTION OF SUBSTITUTING THE FALSE FOR THE GENUINE, OR
OTHERWISE DECEIVING AND DEFRAUDING BY THE USE OF THE SPURIOUS
ARTICLE. To COUNTERFEIT or make FALSELY. Especially, to make a spurious written
instrument WITH THE INTENTION OF FRAUDULENTLY SUBSTITUTING IT FOR
ANOTHER, or of PASSING IT OFF AS GENUINE; or to fraudulently alter a genuine
instrument to another's prejudice; or tO SIGN ANOTHER PERSON'S NAME TO A
DOCUMENT, WITH A DECEITFUL AND FRAUDULENT INTENT. To forge (a metaphorical
expression, borrowed from the occupation of the smith) means, properly speaking, no more than
to MAKE or FORM, but IN OUR LAW IT IS ALWAYS TAKEN IN AN EVIL SENSE. To forge is
TO MAKE IN THE LIKENESS OF SOMETHING ELSE; to counterfeit is to make in imitation
of something else, with a view TO DEFRAUD BY PASSING THE FALSE COPY FOR
GENUINE OR ORIGINAL. Both words, "forged" and Òcounterfeited," convey the idea of
SIMILITUDE. In common usage, however, forgery is almost always predicated of some private
instrument or writing, as a deed, note, will, or a SIGNATURE; and counterfeiting denotes the
fraudulent imitation of coined or paper money or some SUBSTITUTE therefor. (Black1)

SIMILITUDE - noun - [Latin similitudo.] 1. Likeness; resemblance; likeness in nature, qualities

of APPEARANCE; AS SIMILITUDE OF SUBSTANCE. Let us make man in OUR image, MAN
IN OUR SIMILITUDEÉ 2. Comparison; simile. Tasso, in his similitude never departed from the
woods. (Webs1828)

SIMILE - noun - [Latin] In rhetoric, SIMILITUDE; a comparison of two things which, however
different in other respects, have some strong point or points of RESEMBLANCE; by which
comparison, the CHARACTER or qualities of a thing are ILLUSTRATED OR PRESENTED
in an impressive lightÉ (Webs1828)

SAME - The word "same" does not always mean "identical," not different or other. It
frequently means OF THE KIND OR SPECIES, NOT THE SPECIFIC THING. When
preceded by the deÞnite article, meaning the one just referred to. (Black4)

IDENTITY - Law of Evidence. SAMENESS; the FACT that a SUBJECT, PERSON, or THING
before a court is the SAME as it is REPRESENTED, CLAIMED, or CHARGED TO BE. (Black4)

IDENTIFICATION - PROOF OF IDENTITY; the proving that a PERSON, SUBJECT, OR

ARTICLE before the court is the very SAME that he or it is ALLEGED, CHARGED, OR
REPUTED TO BE; as where a witness recognizes the prisoner at the bar as the same person
whom he saw committing the crime; or where HANDWRITING, stolen goods, counterfeit
coin, etc., are recognized as the same which once passed under the observation of the person
identifying them. (Black4)

ALLOGRAPH - A writing or SIGNATURE MADE FOR A PERSON BY ANOTHER;

OPPOSED TO AUTOGRAPH. (Black4)

AUTOGRAPH - One's handwriting. (Black4)

!856
 AUTOGRAPHIC - Self-writing or self-recording. (Black4)

—=—

“True identity is collected from a multitude of SIGNS.”

—IDENTITAS VERA COLLIGITUR EX MULTITUDINE SIGNORUM. Bac. Max. (Black4)

—=—

While the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms have no choice but to fall prey to these legally
forged names under man’s legalized (anti-God) dominion, man in his ability to speak and make
choices presents the ultimate challenge to the total domination of mankind by those that claim god-
like governing authority over him. So the illusionist’s trick of casting word spells in law (legalese)
is utilized to make men believe in the words (names and titles) more than the Reality of the object
so named. The simulation becomes the false reality, the person the man. It is incredibly sad and
infuriating to realize that this entire legal structure and the language that deÞnes it was all created
to corrupt, just as man’s designs have so corrupted Nature throughout his history. This design is a
trap laid to re-create legalized beasts out of most men so that we never realize, in our induced
animal (human) nature, our own power to simply say no. Thus we have no idea how to thwart evil
(artiÞce) by acting only in a True religious state of Being under a Purely moral Law, in the Purest
substance and action of Love and Charity under God. For this would be an illegal life-style!

And to accomplish this great feat of anti-Nature, of the anti-Real, man must be convinced that he is
not man at all but instead a mere similitude of man — a HU-man; the artful name of a strawman.

While you or your children may dream that the wizarding world of Harry Potter were a Reality, it
nonetheless remains forever purely Þctional. Ironically, you may dress up in wizard and witch
costumes from the Þctional Harry Potter world, and your appearance may very much resemble a
judges black robe as a costume from the magi-cal legal Þction, minus the pointy hat. Nevertheless,
Harry Potter and those legal judges both remain purely Þctional characters in a Þctional world,
given what appears to be magi-cal power in the Real world only by imagination and contractual
agreement through silent consent to such word illusion.

But even the Þction of Hogwarts gives us clues as to its own hidden meaning, where the magic
words spoken as protective spells Þguratively exist in that Þctional legal parlance; a Hollywood
simulation of the already make-believe, existing legal simulation:

PATRONUS - IN ROMAN LAW. A person who stood in the relation of PROTECTOR TO

ANOTHER who was called his "client." ONE WHO ADVISED HIS CLIENT IN MATTERS
OF LAW, AND ADVOCATED HIS CAUSES IN COURT. (Black4)

CLIENT - noun - 1. AMONG THE ROMANS, A CITIZEN who put himself under the
protection of a man of distinction and inßuence, who, in respect to that relation, was called
his PATRON. Hence in modern usage, 2. ONE WHO APPLIES TO A LAWYER OR
COUNSELOR FOR ADVICE AND DIRECTION IN A QUESTION OF LAW, OR
COMMITS HIS CAUSE to his management in prosecuting a claim, OR DEFENDING
AGAINST a suit, in a court of justice. 3. A DEPENDENT. (Webs1828)

AGENT - adjective - ACTING; OPPOSED TO PATIENT, or sustaining action; as, the body
agent. [Little used.] - noun - 1. AN ACTOR; one that exerts power, or has the power to act; as,
a moral agent. 2. An active power or cause; THAT WHICH HAS THE POWER TO
PRODUCE AN EFFECT; as, heat is a powerful agent. 3. A SUBSTITUTE, deputy, or factor;
ONE ENTRUSTED WITH THE BUSINESS OF ANOTHER; an ATTORNEY; a MINISTER.
(Webs1828)

—=—

!857
Very clever, the Latin patronus (attorney) spell summoned by the wave of a satanic Holly wood
wand comes to the aid of the muggled mind of the unlearned child (non compos mentis mud-blood)
to protect against the dementors (de-minders), which in the end are also merely agents under a
different description, as executive deputies and law enforcers acting under mere color of law,
authority, and license. They are just the typical minions of government; demonic hirelings and
hitmen invoked into authority by the magical words of judicial opinions and licenses, which can
only be controlled by other magical spells, the spelling of legally binding terms of art. Of course,
without those multitudes of minion policing agents, the judicial and governing body (the state)
would have no power behind its empty words. This was just a little spell of legal word magic
slipped in under her fan’s noses, and was certainly not the only example. In the public, though, a
muggle’s only aid is an attorney, an advocate, the adders of vice as agentic oppressors of thought.

In 2014, it was made public by her attorney and in various news sources that Rowling’s other pen
name was Robert Galbraith! Yep, J. K. Rowling also masquerades as a dude! Of course, it’s all just
legal make-believe, despite the very Real and powerful “magical” effect induced upon men’s
minds by this counter-cultural coven of mind-dementing wordsmiths.

This clandestine gloriÞcation of the practitioners (attorneys) of the legal profession might change
your perception of just what the Harry Potter stories are pushing upon children and adults beneath
their special effects and child-like sophistry. Hollywood is far more dangerous than you might
expect. I know, for I worked and lived there for 9 years putting sounds to movies, games, and
commercials in post production; a career I gave up once I fully understood the devilish nature of a
propagandist industry and its Truly evil intent Ñ as the blackest heart and soul of Þctional creation.

A judge rules only on the Þction of the law (the law of the land and sea) as it applies to dead
persons (mortals), not Living men. Likewise, a judge rules only on the legal estate and title to the
landed property, not the actual (Natural) land or soil Itself. The judge, as a creation of the Þction (a
Þction of law), can only judge other Þctional things as lesser creations in the status and jurisdiction
of that same Þction. For a judge is but a Þctional, titled character as well, not a man. If no man dons
a robe and pretends to act as if he were a judge in God’s stead, then no judge would exist in the
Þctional story of any court. The man must enjoin himself with a Þctional title for the Þction to live
(evil). Inversely, if no man appears in the Þctional room where the judge pretends to have
jurisdiction over all Þctional things, surnames, and legally assigned titles of men, then the judge
has no jurisdiction over any man. Only when man appears as an enjoined (incorporated), Þctional
persona in declared agency does man himself fall under that Þctional jurisdiction in bonded surety.

And so the de-mentors are called in once the administrative judgement of the gods is spoken:

DEMENTED - Of unsound mind. (Black4)

DEMENCY - Dementia, med. jur. A DEFECT, hebetude, or IMBECILITY OF THE UNDER

STANDING, GENERAL OR PARTIAL, BUT CONFINED TO INDIVIDUAL FACULTIES OF
THE MIND, PARTICULARLY THOSE CONCERNED IN ASSOCIATING AND COMPARING
IDEAS, whence proceeds great CONFUSION AND INCAPACITY IN ARRANGING THE
THOUGHTS. 2. Demency is attended with a general enfeeblement of the MORAL AND
INTELLECTUAL faculties, CONSEQUENCE OF AGE OR DISEASE, which were originally
well developed and sound. It is characterised by forgetfulness of the past; indifference to the
present and future, and a childish disposition. It differs from idiocy and imbecility. In these
latter, THE POWERS OF THE MIND WERE NEVER POSSESSED, WHILE IN DEMENCY,
THEY HAVE BEEN LOST. 3. Demency may also be distinguished from mania, with which it is
sometimes confounded. In the former (demency), THE MIND HAS LOST ITS STRENGTH,
AND THEREBY THE REASONING FACULTY IS IMPAIR-ED; while in the latter, the madness
arises from an exaltation of vital power, or from a morbid excess of activity… 5. When demency
has been fully established in its last stages, THE ACTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL OF A CIVIL
NATURE WILL BE VOID, BECAUSE THE PARTY HAD NO CONSENTING MIND. Vide
Contracts; Wills. HAVING NO LEGAL WILL OR INTENTION, HE CANNOT OF COURSE
COMMIT A CRIME. Vide Insanity; Mania. (Bouv1856)

!858
 DEMENTIA - See Insanity. (Black4)

MENTE CAPTUS - Persons who are habitually insane. (Black4)

DE - A Latin preÞx, denotes a moving from, separationÉ Hence it often expresses a

negative… (Webs1828)

MENTORIAL - adjective - [From MENTOR, the friend and adviser of Ulysses.]

CONTAINING ADVICE OR ADMONITION. (Webs1828)

ADMONITION - noun - Gentle reproof; counseling against a fault; instruction in duties;

caution; direction. Titus 3:10. 1 Corinthians 10:11. In church discipline, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE
REPROOF TO RECLAIM AN OFFENDER; A STEP PRELIMINARY TO
EXCOMMUNICATION. (Webs1828)

—=—

No surprise hereÉ just more legalese put into a not-so-mystical story form to create Hollywood
magic. The dementors cause the mind to loose its ability to choose the correct, moral path. They are
thus merely antichrist characters, the anthropomorphized policing agents of government acting
upon the warrant of the black-robed attorneyÕs (devilÕs) will and decision.

To be clear, Holly wood comes from the Holly tree. It is considered to be a most sacred tree in
witchcraft, just as the propaganda machine of enter-tain-ment that styles itself in that woodÕs
namesake. This is, of course, no coincidence. Names are everything. Names are magical. Foolish
ÒChristiansÓ and non-Christians alike hang decorative Holly branches upon their doors and
around their house (dwelling) at what societally and commercially is called Christmas time
without even the slightest comprehension of the pagan origins and antichrist intent of their actions.
And what else would one expect to see from a common people raised with Hollywood enter-tain-
ment as their dementor disguised as a mentor (teacher and friend).

It is mythically foretold that the branch of the Holly tree, if thrown at any animal, even without
touching it, had the property of compelling the animal to return and lie down by the thrower; a
taming of the low, animal beasts. Is this not the obvious magical purpose of Hollywood enter-tain-
ment? Not at all surprising, the wood of the Holly tree was actually, historically used by ancient
Druids in the fabrication of their magic wands. And IÕm sure it was merely a coincidence that
Micky MouseÕs wand in Fantasia was also pretended to be crafted of the wood of the Holly tree.
And the wand of Harry Potter? Why, its made of Holly wood, of course! Holly was to the druids
also a most sacred symbol, referentially symbolic to the sacred mother Holle or Hel, the goddess of
the underworld. Hollywood (the druidic Hel-wood) is merely an imaginary place, but stands as a
production house of visual and audial magic used for purely evil intent. ItÕs all about the illusion.

J.K. Rowling, author of the Harry Potter series, states from her own website:

ÒI gave Harry a wand made of holly wood back in 1990, when I Þrst drafted chapter six of
ÔPhilosopherÕs Stone.Õ IT WAS NOT AN ARBITRARY DECISION: holly has certain
connotations that were perfect for Harry, particularly when contrasted with the traditional
associations of yew, from which VoldemortÕs wand is made. European tradition has it that the
holly tree (the name comes from ÔHOLYÕ) repels evil, while yew, which can achieve
astonishing longevity (there are British yew trees over two thousand years old), can symbolize
both DEATH AND RESURRECTION; the sap is also poisonous.Ó
—Source website: http://www.jkrowling.com

—=—


What is holy to those in evil pursuits is of course intently opposite of what is Truly Holy under
Jehovah. Such evil intent and use of sacred (cursed) words by such artiÞcers is always adversarial,
appearing as a perceptual similitude but never sameness. Hollywood is used to cast spells from

!859
worded scripts and with hypnotizing sound and “music” emanating from a conductors wand
(baton) that just happens to be made of that same Living source of magic, from the wood of the
Holy tree. Dismiss this as coincidence at your own, and that of your children’s dementia and legal
peril. For while this author of magical word-spells and tales appears to be speaking gobbledygook
in her magical incantations and spellings, she is actually using the king’s higher language of
illusion, as the Latin legalese, while her victims (readers and fans) hear only the dog-Latin English
words we are literally, publicly entrained to love (believe in) and be fascinated by their magics.

However, while the magic spells of the movies may not be able to physically harm you as they
appear in your living room television or on the big screen, their effect as to the control over your
mind (mentis) and your future actions is a different story. The magi-strates of the legal world have
convinced you that their magi-cal words (spells) are Real, and so the legal Þction and its lies
certainly may harm you in Real Life, through your faith in the contractual birth-bond that you and
others act out a civil life within, as Þctional (surnamed), scripted characters.

This is called belief.

(BE-LIE-f): Be the lie…

Belief (love) in the representation (name) of anything of substance is nothing more than the tainted
perception of Reality, no matter how opposed to Reality our beliefs (truths) may be. And while
Reality (the Nature of Truth) never changes, perception (artful truth) is ever-changing; as with the
ebb and ßow of experience and referential knowledge from the tree of good and evil, of useless,
conceptual in-formation. As a member of the Þctional society, called a public Òcitizen,Ó we
participate in and validate the power of the spell (Þction) over our True Selves. We wear our legal
(anti-God), corporate persona (mask) like a veil of invisible, corporate clothing.

To be the lie or not to be the lie, that is Truly the only question… BeLIEve it or not! Live or play dead.

If you beLIEve you are the lie in the form of a false persona with a surname and other marks of
false id-entity, that you can be and are a Þctional character in a Þctional world, and that this belief
gives you imaginary special powers called “rights” and “privileges” and thus certain licensed or
permitted status over or under others, then you perceive the Þctional world as the truth — a false
reality. A prison for your mind… And this is where wars, pestilence, poverty, hunger, eugenics, and
the corporate religions and governments that cause them are created and approved as necessary to
maintain these Þctional realities. Wars are fought to preserve established, legal truths (conÞrmed,
ratiÞed, and violently sanctioned lies). The ÞctionÕs goal is solely to maintain its own false existence,
subsistence, and sustainability of the big lie that it has become. It has no other goal but its own
perpetual existence, no matter what the cost to Nature and Life Itself. It is the incarnation and
personiÞcation (incorporation) of ever-expanding evil. And the men behind the Þctional curtain
make it all happen while remaining hidden under the veil, behind the wizarding legal curtain of
Oz. To love or to hate the Þction requires Þrst belief in the false existence of Þction and its power.

In a recent propaganda article posted on the dictionary.com website I was surprised to Þnd in these
following tidbits some of the legal terms portrayed as magic words (spells) in the Harry Potter
series. We Þnd the same bloodlines and feudal class structures of that apparently Þctional Harry
Potter world to be but a cartoonish mirror image our own.

“Do you know why we non-magical folks are referred to as muggles in the world of Harry
Potter?”

“J.K. Rowling says she created the word MUGGLE from MUG, AN ENGLISH TERM FOR
SOMEONE WHO IS EASILY FOOLED. At the 2004 World Book Day, Rowling said: "I was
looking for a word that suggested BOTH FOOLISHNESS AND LOVEABILITY. The word
'mug' came to mind, FOR SOMEBODY GULLIBLE, and then I softened it. I think 'muggle'
sounds quite cuddly. I didn't know that the word 'muggle' had been used as drug slang at that
point... ah well.Ó It's true, one of the other deÞnitions for muggle, is a slang term for
marijuana, but obviously that's not where Rowling was going…”

!860
 “A mandrake is a narcotic, short stemmed European plant. In Harry Potter and the Chamber
of Secrets, we learn that a Mandrake, or Mandragora, is a powerful, RESTORATIVE plant.
They are used TO “RETURN PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN TRANSFIGURED OR CURSED
TO THEIR ORIGINAL STATE.” Professor Sprout teaches herbology students how to repot
the plants. They must wear earmuffs, because “THE CRY OF A MANDRAKE IS FATAL TO
ANYONE WHO HEARS IT.” When Professor Dumbledore tells Argus Filch that his cat, Mrs.
Norris, IS PETRIFIED (NOT DEAD), mandrakes are the SOLUTION: “We will be able to
cure her, Argus,” said Dumbledore patiently. “Professor Sprout recently managed to procure
some Mandrakes. As soon as they have reached their full size, I will have a potion made that
will revive Mrs. Norris.”

Marauder’s Map: “A marauder is someone who roams or goes on A QUEST OF PLUNDER.

In Harry Potter, marauders are MORE MISCHIEVOUS THAN CRIMINAL. The Marauder’s
Map is a magical document that young wizards use to roam within Hogwarts AND FIND
SECRET PASSAGES TO LEAVE THE CASTLE. In Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban,
Fred and George Weasley give the Marauder’s Map to Harry. Fred says IT HELPS “A NEW
GENERATION OF LAW-BREAKERS.Ó At Þrst, Harry thinks itÕs a Òbit of old parchmentÓ:
George took out his wand, touched the parchment lightly and said, “I SOLEMNLY SWEAR
THAT I AM UP TO NO GOOD.” [The Marauder’s Map] was a map showing every detail of
the Hogwarts castle and grounds. But the truly remarkable thing were the tiny ink dots
moving around it, EACH LABELED WITH A NAME in minuscule writing.”

—Source for reference: http://www.dictionary.com/slideshows/hogwarts-dictionary#remembrall

—=—

We are all, of course, cursed outside of our original (ancestral) state of Being (Source). This is very
clever devilry indeed, my innocent little Mrs. Rowling! But why must the enslaved children wear
earmuffs when handling this restorative agent? How could the cure, the solution, possibly harm
them? The answer to this of course is that the mandrake’s cry kills their persona, their ßattering
tittles, and the pretended power of their fabled genealogy. Without registered identity, they
would become civilly dead (without legal (magical) capacity), and thus their use of these
proprietary magical words would be uncontrollable. The mandrake is the metaphoric solution to a
civil life (petriÞcation). Without it, one would lose oneÕs limited license to cast spells in legal terms.

Could this whole magical story simply be Rowling’s twisted interpretation of her own experiences
in university, where she learned these older languages in her own education and research?

PETRIFIED - participle passive - Changed into stone. 1. FIXED IN AMAZEMENT. (Webs1828)

WAKENING - participle present tense - ROUSING FORM SLEEP OR STUPIDITY; CALLING

INTO ACTION. (Webs1828)

WAKENING - Scotch law. The revival of an action. 2. An ACTION is said TO SLEEP, when it
lies over, not insisted on for a year in which case it is suspended. With us A REVIVAL is by
scire facias. (Black4)

SCIRE FACIAS - Remedies, practice. The name of a judicial writ… 2. It is, however,
considered as AN ACTION, and IN THE NATURE OF A NEW ORIGINAL. 3. The scire
facias against a bail, against pledges in replevin, TO REPEAL LETTERS-PATENT, or the
like, is an ORIGINAL proceeding; but when brought to revive a judgment after a year and a
day, or upon the death or marriage of the parties… it is but A CONTINUATION OF THE
ORIGINAL ACTION. (Bouv1856)
REVIVE - TO RENEW, revivify; TO MAKE ONE'S SELF LIABLE FOR A DEBT BARRED
BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS BY ACKNOWLEDGING IT; or for a matrimonial
offense, once condoned, by committing another. (Black4)

!861
 REVIVAL - The process of RENEWING THE OPERATIVE FORCE OF A JUDGMENT
WHICH HAS REMAINED DORMANT OR UNEXECUTED FOR SO LONG A TIME THAT
EXECUTION CANNOT BE ISSUED UPON IT WITHOUT NEW PROCESS TO
REANIMATE IT. THE ACT OF RENEWING THE LEGAL FORCE OF A CONTRACT OR
OBLIGATION, which had ceased to be sufÞcient foundation for an action, on account of the
running of the statute of limitations, by giving a new promise or acknowledgment of it.
(Black4)

—=—

Man-drake = man-dragon. The word drake is Latin for dragon. The serpent… Man as the devil…

And so, the Harry Potter series, written by a lover of magical (legal) items and words, is about an
organized, pure bloodline (extended family) of magical spell-casters that create magical realms
(jurisdictions) no muggle can comprehend while using magical terms of art (legalese) to cast spells
on the gullible public of corrupted and half-blood mugs? Sounds just like the real world, doesn’t
not? GeeÉ I want my kids to watch that, for sure! After all, theyÕll never Þgure out itÕs actually
their own life story of former abandonment through delivery as goyim in persona of the state! They
surely will never realize that these marauding pirates of the make-believe magical (legal) world are
Real. And our children will never catch on to the fact that the very reason they are allowed to
watch such trash on the television is to keep them from studying the Bible as the Law and Truth of
all things. They will watch movies and cartoons because they aren’t instead working the land that
would one day be passed by blood to them, harvesting the crops and attending to the livestock, all
because long ago the mugs that are mommy and daddy also fell under their piratical, magical
spellings, meaning that mommy and daddy have no land and no estate to Truly give their
offspring. They can only offer debt and empty titles. There is no point in teaching the children well,
for their public-mindedness is reinforced in every facet of their legalized, licensed lives. To teach
them the Right, spiritual path would likely interfere with their public-minded, muggle studies and
cause them unnecessary confusion, pain, and anguish in their life-long pursuits under mammon
that only beneÞt the bloodline. To teach the moral law would be cruel and unusual punishment!

But let’s not get sidetracked with these principal players, entertainers, and wordsmiths of this
agentic game. Let’s not play the blame game or use individuals as excuses for our own actions and
inactions. Instead let’s forgive this published agent of the Crown for her deceits against our gullible
lifestyle and otherwise innocent children via the corruption of magic (legal) words and through the
arcane of visual imagery stemming from the rotten core of that Holly wood tree of good and evil.

The remaining sections of this work (including future Volumes) are designed to expound and
enlighten upon the concepts presented in these Þrst summary chapters. To that end, legal terms
(word magic) will be further explored and exhaustively deÞned so that the reader may better
comprehend this false reality of Þction that literally (by words) imprisons our minds. So many more
sources will be presented as to the True nature of the corporate church and that of its artiÞcial
persona (corporation sole) called “pope,” as well as many scriptural presentments and
prognostications on the subject.

PROGNOSTICATION - noun - The act of foreshowing a future event BY PRESENT SIGNS.

1. The act of FORETELLING AN EVENT BY PRESENT SIGNS. 2. A foretoken; previous
sign. (Webs1828)

—=—

While some of the words and terms of art we have discussed thus far may remain as yet unclear or
undeÞned at this point, and while some of what makes up these Truths may have offended your
own personal beLIEfs, I promise you’ll feel right as rain by the end of this multi-voluminous work.

Have another cookie and let’s continue…


!862
 —=—

Chapter 3:
Augmented Reality, ArtiÞcial Life,

And The Simulation Of Creation
—=—
Just what does it mean to live in sin?

One thing for sure, it is deÞnitely not what youÕve been taught by the corporate (artiÞcial) church,
which is protected by the executive, military authority of the Þctional state.

First and foremost, we must know that the word sin is equal to the words lie, artiÞce, and simulation.
In fact, we must recognize that the whole legal system of government and law is in fact a
simulation Ñ a matrix of word-code and Þction that is recognized artiÞcially as Òfact.Ó But then,
from satanÕs perspective, what else would one expect? For all kings are only the kings of their own
lies and that of their heraldic forbearers.

SIMULATE - TO ASSUME THE MERE APPEARANCE OF, WITHOUT THE REALITY; to

assume the SIGNS or indications of, FALSELY; to counterfeit; feign; imitate; PRETEND. TO
ENGAGE, usually with the co-operation or connivance of another person, in an act or series
of acts, which are APPARENTLY TRANSACTED IN GOOD FAITH, and intended to be
followed by their ordinary legal consequences, but WHICH IN REALITY CONCEAL A
FRAUDULENT PURPOSE OF THE PARTY TO GAIN THEREBY SOME ADVANTAGE TO
WHICH HE IS NOT ENTITLED, or to INJURE, DELAY, or DEFRAUD others. (Black4)

SIMULATION - Assumption of appearance which was feigned, false, deceptive, or

counterfeit. In the civil law. Misrepresentation or concealment of the truth; as where parties
pretend to perform a transaction different from that in which they really are engaged. A
feigned, pretended act, ONE WHICH ASSUMES THE APPEARANCE WITHOUT THE
REALITY and, being entirely WITHOUT EFFECT, IT IS HELD NOT TO HAVE EXISTED,
and, for that reason, it may be disregarded or attacked collaterally by any interested person.
In French law. COLLUSION; a fraudulent arrangement between two or more persons TO
GIVE A FALSE OR DECEPTIVE APPEARANCE TO A TRANSACTION IN WHICH THEY
ENGAGE. (Black4)

Ñ=Ñ

Simulation and citizenship are virtually the same words. We are born into sin (simulation) by being
borne within a nation. And so we have a simulated birth into a simulated legal realm of simulated
jurisdiction, proven by simulated facts which create a simulated contract by which we are judged
under simulated gods with simulated authority. But all of this starts with the simulated purchase
(sale/conquering) of man out from under God (Reality) at a simulated birth from his own
voluntarily ignorant parents acting themselves as a simulated people.

!863
Birth is akin to a simulated sale.

SIMULATED SALE - One which has all the appearance of an actual sale in good faith,
INTENDED TO TRANSFER THE OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY FOR A
CONSIDERATION, but which IN REALITY COVERS A COLLUSIVE DESIGN OF THE
PARTIES to put the property beyond the reach of creditors, or proceeds from some other
fraudulent purpose. It results when parties execute A FORMAL ACT OF SALE OF A
THING FOR WHICH NO PRICE IS PAID or is intended to be paid, and such sale HAS NO
LEGAL EFFECT AND NO TITLE IS TRANSFERRED THEREBY. If there exists an actual
consideration for transfer evidenced by alleged act of sale, no matter how inadequate it be, the
transaction is not a "simulated sale,” and, even though it be charged to be in fraud of vendor's
creditors, such transfer cannot be set aside as a simulation although it may be SUBJECT TO
ANNULMENT ON THE GROUND OF FRAUD or the giving of undue preference. (Black4)

SIMULATED FACT - In the law of evidence. A fabricated fact; AN APPEARANCE GIVEN

TO THINGS BY HUMAN DEVICE, with a view to deceive and mislead. (Black4)

SIMULATED CONTRACT - One which, though CLOTHED in concrete FORM, HAS NO

EXISTENCE IN FACT. It may at any time and at the demand of any person in interest BE
DECLARED A SHAM and may be ignored by creditors of the apparent vendor. (Black4)

SIMULATED JUDGMENT - One which is apparently rendered in good faith, upon an actual
debt, and intended to be collected by the usual process of law, BUT WHICH IN REALITY
IS ENTERED BY THE FRAUDULENT CONTRIVANCE OF THE PARTIES, for the purpose
of giving to one of them an advantage to which HE IS NOT ENTITLED, or of defrauding or
delaying THIRD PERSONS. (Black4)

—=—

To be born in the blood of your mother is the gift of God. To be borne (taxed) into the artiÞcial
system through simulated birth certiÞcation and registration as a legal entity is quite another
matter. As we will discuss further in this work, one either bears the Arms of his blood, or he carries
the Arms (seal) of the state (nation). Arms and weapons are not necessarily synonymous, though
sometimes are used together. To bear Arms is to wear the bloodline of one’s family and therefore
one’s legitimacy upon one’s Self. This is the great mystery of hidden knowledge regarding the 2nd
amendment of the US constitution, for the right to bear Arms (heraldry and genealogy as
“posterity”) shall not be disturbed. It is vulgar and frankly plain good-old fashioned American
public ignorance to consider this word “Arms” simply as guns or other weaponry. Remember, the
higher (more authoritative) language must be applied to all legal writings, and the constitution is
certainly no exception.

Let us now examine the birth certiÞcation and registration process and what it accomplishes in
simulation of Life:

Difference Between Birth CertiÞcate And CertiÞcate Of Live Birth:

Written by: J. Hirby

For most purposes of identiÞcation, people use the Birth CertiÞcate as the original
document. But some have recently heard about something called the CertiÞcate of Live Birth.
What is the difference between the Birth CertiÞcate and CertiÞcate of Live Birth?

“Hospital Record of Birth: CertiÞcate of Live Birth”

The medical community has established the PRACTICE of ISSUING the CertiÞcate of Live
Birth when a HUMAN BEING enters the world. This form will include the basics of the baby
name, parent names, doctor names, hospital, sex, race, date of birth and person completing the
record. Health care professionals will then enter the INFORMATION into their hospital
database.

!864
 At this point, the father should verify that the information on the form is correct. Mistakes can
be made on the original form or during medical data entry. The mother will, of course, be
stressed and won't be able to concentrate when given the form. Corrections should be made
before the Birth CertiÞcate is ofÞcially issued.

The CertiÞcate of Live Birth is the Þrst UNOFFICIAL DRAFT of the fact that your mother
gave birth to you. Once this information is complete, this CertiÞcate of Live Birth is sent to
the OfÞce of Vital Statistics or State REGISTER to create the OFFICIAL Birth CertiÞcate.

ÒOfÞcial Government Issued Record of Birth: Birth CertiÞcate”

For the sake of school, insurance, taxes, identiÞcation cards and travel documents, you should
use your Birth CertiÞcate. While the CertiÞcate of Live Birth shows that you are
MEDICALLY ALIVE, the Birth CertiÞcate is the OFFICIAL RECORD DECLARING YOUR
PLACE OF BIRTH. Some people are not born in hospitals and don't have these other records.

The United States federal government may not take your CertiÞcate of Live Birth for Passport
purposes either. There have been some difÞculties with birth documents in Puerto Rico. It is
always wise to have your ofÞcial Birth CertiÞcate in a safe deposit box.

Remember that the live birth hospital form is primarily for data entry purposes. Your Birth
CertiÞcate is for ofÞcial RECORDING purposes and will have the signature and date of a
STATE OFFICIAL on the bottom. It should be printed on high-quality paper or cardboard
WITH A REGISTRAR'S EMBOSSED STATE SEAL in the corner for authenticity. This
ofÞcial Birth CertiÞcate will also have a REGISTRATION NUMBER, so it can easily be
looked up for reference.

Ñthelawdictionary.org (BlackÕs Law 2nd Edition online), article: Òdifference between birth certiÞcate and certiÞcate of live birthÓ

—=—

Once the mother has ÒinformedÓ on her Real baby, creating the simulation (character) of a legal
child (person) through her state signature and application called the ÒCertiÞcate Of Live Birth,Ó
only then has that legal evidence of an event (Þctionally birthed life) been invoked (word magic) in
the creation of a legal entity (person) that ties and incorporates the God-given Þrst (christian) name
and state-given last name (surname) together. This is the Þctional marriage of names (of Nature
and artiÞciality). The informer (paternal mother) allows for her offspring to be issued as surety to
an informal legal person (in form not substance).

Per this record, having been re-created and registered into an ofÞcial entity recognizable by birth
certiÞcate and as a Þctional person who is birthed (borne/carried on paper) into the United States
as its corporate subject (natural person), the child as reared into adulthood until death is thus
required to bear the burden of the Arms (ßag and seal) of its adoptive ÒfamilyÓ and ÒfatherÓ Ñ the
artiÞcial body politic (artiÞcial person) that is the United States - in order to claim legal rights and
beneÞts from his legal Þction master. Through this artiÞcial ÒlegalÓ birth his blood has been
corrupted by the voluntary attainder and registration of the birth certiÞcation process. This Þctional
person (status) is described by Òvital statistics,Ó which are merely words on paper as legal signs
and tokens of id-entity.

This Reality of simulation will be made ever more clear as we progress. But for now, note the
difference between the word born (blood inheritance) and borne (carried) as deÞned below, and
that these words are used interchangeably by the legal deceivers. Note too that in the Þctional
world of Þnance and commerce it is only commercial paper that is carried. A manifest, for instance,
displays the description of cargo. We wear a custom-made and tailored, bonded and impressed
paper law-suit of personhood, thus manifesting our Þctional representation and disposition. A man
of straw (paper).

!865
 PAPER - A written or printed document or instrument. A document Þled or introduced in
evidence in a suit at law, as, in the phrase "papers in the case" and in "papers on appeal." Any
writing or printed document, including letters, memoranda, legal or business documents, and
books of account, as in the constitutional provision which protects the people from
unreasonable searches and seizures in respect to their "papers" as well as their houses and
persons. A written or printed EVIDENCE OF DEBT, particularly a promissory note or a bill
of exchange, as in the phrases "accommodation paper" and "commercial paper." In English
practice. The list of causes or cases intended for argument, called "the paper of
causes.” (Black2)

COMMERCIAL - adjective - 1. Pertaining to commerce or trade; as commercial concerns;

commercial relations. 2. CARRYING on commerce; AS A COMMERCIAL NATION. 3.
Proceeding (borne) from trade; as commercial beneÞts or proÞts. (Webs1828)

COMMERCIAL PAPER - The term “commercial paper” means bills of exchange, promissory
notes, bank-checks, and other negotiable instruments for the payment of money, which, by
their form and on their face, purport to be such instruments as are by the law-merchant
recognized as falling under the designation of “commercial paper.” Commercial paper
means negotiable paper given in due course of business, whether the element of negotiability
be given it by the law-merchant or by statute. A note given by a merchant for money loaned
is within the meaning. (Black2)

ACCOMMODATION PAPER - An accommodation bill or note is one to which the

accommodating party, be he acceptor, drawer, or indorser, has put his NAME, WITHOUT
CONSIDERATION, FOR THE PURPOSE OF BENEFITING OR ACCOMMODATING
SOME OTHER PARTY WHO DESIRES TO RAISE MONEY ON IT, and is to provide for
the bill when due. Must be executed for the purpose of loaning credit, and incidental beneÞt
to party is insufÞcient. (Black2)

PROCEEDING - participle present tense - Moving forward; passing on; ISSUING; transacting;
CARRYING ON. - noun - Process or movement from one thing to another; a measure or step
taken in business; transaction; in the plural, a course of measures or conduct; COURSE OF
DEALING WITH OTHERS. We speak of a legal or an illegal proceeding… It is our duty to
acquiesce cheerfully in all God's proceedings towards. 1. In law, the course of steps or
measures in the prosecution of an action is denominated proceedings. [See Process.]
(Webs1828)

TRANSACTION - Act of transacting or conducting any business; negotiation; management;

proceeding; that which is done; an affair. Something which has taken place, whereby a
CAUSE of action has arisen. It must therefore consist of an act or agreement, or several acts
or agreements having some connection with each other, in which more than one person is
concerned, and BY WHICH THE LEGAL RELATIONS OF SUCH PERSONS BETWEEN
THEMSELVES ARE ALTERED. A broader term than “contract.” A GROUP OF FACTS SO
CONNECTED TOGETHER AS TO BE REFERRED TO BY A SINGLE LEGAL NAME; AS A
CRIME, A CONTRACT, A WRONG. (Black4)

—=—

Perhaps the easiest way of comprehending what citizenship to mammon is can be explained by
deÞning what it is to be an endorser. For the power of being assigned to a commercial entity as the
persona representing a status in citizen-ship is as well the licensed (anarchical) power to create
money (debt) by that strawman's signature.

IN - A preÞx, Latin in is used in composition as a particle of negation, like the English un, of
which it seems to be a dialectical orthography; or it denotes within, into, or among, as in
inbred, incase; or it serves only to augment or render emphatical the sense of the word to

!866
which it is preÞxed, as in inclose, increase. - preposition - [Latin in ] in denotes present or
inclosed, SURROUNDED BY LIMITS; A STATE OF BEING MIXED, OR COMBINED… It
denotes PRESENT IN ANY STATE; as in sickness or health. It denotes present in time… In
the name, is used in phrases of invoking, SWEARING, declaring, praying, etc. In prayer, it
denotes by virtue of, or for the sake of. In the name of the people, denotes ON THEIR
BEHALF or part; IN THEIR STEAD, or FOR THEIR SAKE. In, in many cases, is equivalent to
on. This use of the word is frequent in the Scriptures; as, let fowls multiply in the earth. This
use is more frequent in England than in America. We generally use on, in all similar phrases. In
signiÞes by or throughÉ In that, is sometimes equivalent to because. (Webs1828)

DORSUM - Latin. The back. In dorso recordi, on the back of the record. (Black4)

INDORSE - verb transitive - indors'. [Latin in and dorsum, the back.] 1. To write on the back of
a paper or written instrument; as, to indorse a note or bill of exchange; to indorse a receipt
or assignment on a bill or note. Hence, 2. To assign by writing an order on the back of a note
or bill; TO ASSIGN OR TRANSFER BY INDORSEMENT. The bill was indorsed to the bank.
To indorse IN BLANK, to write a name only on a note or bill, LEAVING A BLANK TO BE
FILLED BY THE INDORSEE. (Webs1828)

INDORSE - To write a name on the back of a paper or document. Bills of exchange and
promissory notes are indorsed by a party's writing his name on the back. "Indorse" is a
technical term, having sufÞcient LEGAL CERTAINTY without words of more particular
description. (Black4)

INDORSEE - The PERSON to whom a bill of exchange, promissory note, BILL OF

LADING, etc., IS ASSIGNED BY INDORSEMENT. (Black4)

INDORSEE IN DUE COURSE - An indorsee in due course is one who, IN GOOD FAITH, IN
THE ORDINARY COURSE OF BUSINESS, AND FOR VALUE, BEFORE ITS APPARENT
MATURITY OR PRESUMPTIVE DISHONOR, AND WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OF ITS
ACTUAL DISHONOR, ACQUIRES A NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT DULY INDORSED
TO HIM, or indorsed generally, or payable to the bearer. (Black4)

INDORSEMENT - The act of a payee, drawee, accommodation indorser, or holder of a bill,

note, check, or other negotiable instrument, in writing his name upon the back of the same,
with or without further or qualifying words, WHEREBY THE PROPERTY IN THE SAME IS
ASSIGNED AND TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER. That which is so written upon the back
of a negotiable instrument. In the law of negotiable instruments, a new and substantive
contract by which TITLE TO THE INSTRUMENT IS TRANSFERRED AND BY WHICH
INDORSER BECOMES A PARTY TO THE INSTRUMENT AND IS LIABLE, on certain
conditions for its payment. In this respect INDORSEMENT DIFFERS FROM A COMMON-
LAW ASSIGNMENT. One who writes his name upon a negotiable instrument,
OTHERWISE THAN AS A MAKER OR ACCEPTOR, AND DELIVERS IT, with his name
thereon, to another person, is called an Òindorser,Ó and his act is called Òindorsement.Ó The
word "indorsement" is also used with reference to writs, insurance policies, certiÞcates of
stock, etc. The term as used in the Uniform Stock Transfer Act contemplates A WRITING
PASSING OR ATTEMPTING TO PASS TITLE OR AN INTEREST. As applied to a writ or
warrant "indorsement" is an entry made on the back thereof.

Accommodation Indorsement - In the law of negotiable instruments, one made by a third

person without any consideration, but merely for the beneÞt of the holder of the
instrument, or to enable the maker to obtain money or credit on it. Unless otherwise
explained, it is understood to be A LOAN OF THE INDORSER'S CREDIT without
restriction.

Blank Indorsement (blank check) - One made by the mere writing of the indorser's
name on the back of the note or bill, without mention of the name of any person in

!867
 whose favor the indorsement is made, but with the IMPLIED UNDERSTANDING
THAT ANY LAWFUL HOLDER MAY FILL IN HIS OWN NAME ABOVE THE
INDORSEMENT IF HE SO CHOOSES.

Conditional Indorsement - One by which the indorser annexes some condition (other
than the failure of prior parties to pay) to his liability. The condition may be either
precedent or subsequent.

Irregular Indorsement - One made by a third person before DELIVERY of the note to
the payee; an indorsement in blank by a third person above the name of the payee, or
when the payee does not indorse at all… (Black4)

INDORSER - He who indorses; i. e., being the payee or holder, writes his name on the back of
a bill of exchange, etc. (Black4)

INDUCT - TO PUT IN ENJOYMENT OR POSSESSION, ESPECIALLY TO INTRODUCE

INTO POSSESSION OF AN OFFICE OR BENEFICE, with customary ceremonies, to bring
in, INITIATE, TO BE PUT FORMALLY IN POSSESSION, inaugurate or install. (Black4)

INDUCE - To bring on or about, to affect, CAUSE, TO INFLUENCE TO AN ACT OR

COURSE OF CONDUCT, LEAD BY PERSUASION OR REASONING, INCITE BY
MOTIVES, prevail on. (Black4)

INDUCEMENT - In Contracts. THE BENEFIT OR ADVANTAGE WHICH THE PROMISOR

IS TO RECEIVE FROM A CONTRACT is the inducement for making it. In Criminal
Evidence. MOTIVE; THAT WHICH LEADS OR TEMPTS TO THE COMMISSION OF
CRIME. In Pleading. That portion of a declaration or of any subsequent pleading in an action
which is brought forward by way of explanatory introduction to the main allegations. (Black4)

INDUCIAE - In International Law. A truce; a suspension of hostilities; an agreement during


war TO ABSTAIN FOR A TIME FROM WARLIKE ACTS. (Black4)

—=—


Peace, in-deed, is still war.




For a young, ignorant mother, the inducements to Þll out the birth record are many. Nurses are
instructed to insist upon acquiring vital statistic information simply because the government pays
bonuses to hospital administrators for every legal entity created by those records of live birth. The
parents beLIEve (love) the propaganda of the government, which says that by not recording and
registering (taxing) their child’s information into Caesar’s dominions in district (in seizure) that
those great beneÞts of citizenship will not be allotted to the child. Little do they know they are
abandoning their child by never claiming their own paternal property, instead endorsing the child
over to the state as a legal entity in bonded debt-slavery. Inducement to contract, as the intent of the
action, is everything. And so it is this very ignorance and lack of full comprehension that makes the
act of birth registration a fraud. But a fraud is only a fraud when man stops acting fraudulently and
calls the fraud a fraud with true intent in honest disposition of leaving and quitclaiming all beneÞts
of that fraud. This is called as solution; the end of any contractual relation-ship. A citizenship
cannot claim fraud or paternal rights because a citizenship is not a man of authority under God. A
public person can only beget another legal person through endorsement, for a public person is
always acting in fraud.

An endorser is not a maker, nor an acceptor. So when the mother signs the birth certiÞcate, as an
endorsement, the mother is not the maker of the legal entity (Þctional ÒpersonÓ), nor the accepting
party. She is just an illiterate, willing participant in the abandoning through de-livery of her ßesh
and blood offspring. She enables the false gods of the State and district (makers of issues).

!868
MAKE - 1. TO CAUSE TO EXIST; TO FORM, fashion, or produce; to do, perform, or
execute; AS TO MAKE AN ISSUE, to make oath, to make a presentment. 2. To do IN FORM
OF LAW; to perform with due formalities; to execute in legal form; as to make answer, to
make a return. 3. To execute as one's act or obligation; TO PREPARE AND SIGN; to sign,
execute, AND DELIVER; as to make a conveyance, to make a note. 4. To conclude, determine
upon, agree to, or execute; AS TO MAKE A CONTRACT. 5. To cause to happen by one's
neglect or omission; as to make default. 6. TO MAKE ACQUISITION OF; TO PROCURE;
TO COLLECT; as to make the money on an execution. 7. To have authority or inßuence; to
support or sustain; as in the phrase, "This precedent makes for the plaintiff.” (Black1)

MAKE AN ASSIGNMENT - To transfer one's property to an assignee for the beneÞt of

one's creditors. (Black1)

MAKE A CONTRACT - To agree upon, and conclude or ADOPT, a contract. In case of

written contract, TO REDUCE IT TO WRITING, EXECUTE IT INDUE FORM, AND
DELIVER IT AS BINDING. (Black1)

MAKER - One who makes, FRAMES, or ORDAINS; as a "law-maker." One who makes or
EXECUTES; as the maker of a promissory note. (Black1)

WRITTEN INSTRUMENT - Something REDUCED TO WRITING as a means of evidence,

and as THE MEANS OF GIVING FORMAL EXPRESSION TO SOME ACT OR
CONTRACT. (Black4)

ACCEPTOR - The person who accepts a bill of exchange, (generally the drawee,) or who
engages to be primarily responsible for its payment. (Black1)

ACCEPTEUR PAR INTERVENTION - In French law. Acceptor of a bill for honor. (Black1)

ACCEPTARE - Latin. In old pleading. To accept. Acceptavit, he accepted. 2. Non acceptavit, he

did not accept. In civil law. To accept; to assent; to assent to a promise made by another.
(Black4)

ACCEPT - To receive with approval or satisfaction; to receive WITH INTENT TO RETAIN.

Also, in the capacity of drawee of a bill, to recognize the draft, and engage to pay it when due.
(Black1)

ACCEPTANCE - The taking and receiving of anything in good part, and as it were a tacit
agreement to a preceding act, WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEEN DEFEATED OR AVOIDED IF
SUCH ACCEPTANCE HAD NOT BEEN MADE. The act of a person to whom A THING IS
OFFERED OR TENDERED BY ANOTHER, whereby he receives the thing with the
intention of retaining it, such intention being evidenced by a sufÞcient act. The acceptance
of goods sold under a contract which WOULD BE VOID BY THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS
WITHOUT DELIVERY AND ACCEPTANCE involves something more than the act of the
vendor in the delivery. It requires that the vendee should also act, and that his act should be of
such a nature as to indicate that he receives and accepts the goods delivered as his property.
He must receive and retain the articles delivered, intending thereby to assume the title to
them, to constitute the acceptance mentioned in the statute. In marine insurance, THE
ACCEPTANCE OF AN ABANDONMENT BY THE UNDERWRITER IS HIS ASSENT,
either express or to be implied from the surrounding circumstances, to the sufÞciency and
regularity of the abandonment. Its effect is to perfect the insured's right of action as for a total
loss, if the cause of loss and circumstances have been truly disclosed. (Black1)

ABANDON - To desert, SURRENDER, relinquish, give up, or cede. See ABANDONMENT.

(Black1)

!869
 ABANDONEE - A party to whom a right or property is abandoned or relinquished by
another. Applied to the insurers of vessels and cargoes. (Black1)

ABANDONMENT - The surrender, relinquishment, disclaimer, or cession of property

or of rights. The giving up a thing absolutely, without reference to any particular person or
purpose; as throwing a jewel into the highway; leaving a thing to itself, as a vessel at sea;
desertion, or dereliction. In marine insurance. A relinquishment or cession of property by the
owner to the insurer of it, in order to claim as for a total loss, when in fact it is so by
construction only. (Black1)

DESERT - To leave or quit with an INTENTION TO CAUSE A PERMANENT

SEPARATION; to forsake utterly; TO ABANDON. (Black1)

DESERTION - The act by which a person abandons and forsakes, without justiÞcation, or
unauthorized, A STATION OR CONDITION OF PUBLIC OR SOCIAL LIFE,
RENOUNCING ITS RESPONSIBILITIES AND EVADING ITS DUTIES. THE ACT OF
FORSAKING, DESERTING, OR ABANDONING A PERSON WITH WHOM ONE IS
LEGALLY BOUND TO LIVE, OR FOR WHOM ONE IS LEGALLY BOUND TO PROVIDE,
as a wife or husband. The act by which a man QUITS THE SOCIETY OF HIS WIFE AND
CHILDREN, OR EITHER OF THEM, and renounces his duties towards them. (Black1)

—=—

In the corporation of legal marriage, we have been entrained and publicly educated to, at tax-time,
actually write our children off as burdensome dependents instead of as beloved blood descendants, all
in pursuit of more return of wealth in mammon. As christ would say, forgive them, Father, for they
know not what they do.

In essence, oneÕs birth record is the Þrst or original commercial transaction from which all other
actions proceed, and from which all commercial activity is carried and insured upon. Strangely, the
birth certiÞcate is actually referred to as a legal matrix, as something borne into an artiÞcial womb,
signifying the legal proof of origin and creation of a Þctional person (legal entity) in artiÞce. This
legal matrix is the origin of artiÞcial life, and as will be discussed later in this work, is
representative of the state acting maternally as the artiÞcial mother (and paternally as the artiÞcial
father) of the legal child, and is the Þrst draft of a document (instrument) for which all future
copies must be taken. The vital statistics recorded and registered as the Þnal birth certiÞcate forms
the new legal entity in persona, and we wear its Þctional existence with every legal action we take
under that combination and incorporation of names. The matrix (birth certiÞcate) is the simulated
man; the proof of the public invention of a strawman, a dummy corporation, and a receipt (proof)
of a performance debt, which as a legal entity of no substance becomes a simulacrum (a copy
without an original) by our own formal actions in agency.

MATRIX - noun - [Latin matrix from mater, mother.] 1. The womb; the cavity in which the
fetus of an animal is formed and nourished till its birth. 2. A mold; the cavity in which any
thing is formed, and which gives it shape; as the matrix of a TYPE. 3. THE PLACE WHERE
ANY THING IS FORMED OR PRODUCED; as the matrix of metals; gang. 4. In dyeing, the
Þve simple colors, black, white, blue, red and yellow, of which all the rest are composed.
(Webs1828)

ARTIFICER - noun - [Latin artifex, from ars, and facio.] 1. An artist; a mechanic or
manufacturer; one whose occupation requires skill or knowledge of a particular kind; as a
silversmith, or sadler. 2. ONE WHO MAKES OR CONTRIVES; AN INVENTOR; AS AN
ARTIFICER OF FRAUD OR LIES. 3. A cunning, or ARTFUL fellow. [not used.] (Webs1828)

ILLUSION - noun - s as z. [Latin illusio, from illudo, to illude.] DECEPTIVE APPEARANCE;

FALSE SHOW, by which a PERSON is or may be deceived, or his expectations disappointed;
mockery. Ye soft illusions, dear deceits, arise! (Webs1828)

!870
 INVENT - verb transitive - [Latin invenio, inventum; in and venio, to come; literally, to come to,
to fall on, to meet, Eng. to Þnd.] 1. To Þnd out SOMETHING NEW; to DEVISE something
NOT BEFORE KNOWN; to contrive and PRODUCE SOMETHING THAT DID NOT
BEFORE EXIST; as, to invent a new instrument of music; to invent a machine for spinning; to
invent gunpowder. [See Invention.] 2. To forge; to fabricate; TO CONTRIVE FALSELY; AS,
TO INVENT FALSEHOODS. 3. To feign; to FRAME by the imagination; as, to invent the
machinery of a poem. 4. To light on; to meet with. [This is the literal sense, but not now used.]
(Webs1828)


IN - (see above) - preÞx - …denotes present or inclosed, surrounded by limits; A STATE OF
BEING MIXED, OR COMBINED… (Webs1828)

VENT - noun - [Latin venio, Eng. wind, etc.; properly a passage.]… 3. PASSAGE FROM
SECRECY TO NOTICE; PUBLICATION. 4. The act of opening. 5. Emission; passage; escape
from conÞnement; as, his smothered passions urge for vent. 6. Discharge; utterance; means of
discharge. Had like grief been dew'd in tears, without the vent of words. 7. Sale; as the vent of
a thousand copies of a treatise. 8. OPPORTUNITY TO SELL; demand. There is no vent for any
commodity except wool. 9. An inn, a baiting place. [Not in use.] To give vent to, to suffer to
escape; to let out; to pour forth. - verb transitive - 1. To let out at a small aperture. 2. To LET out;
to suffer to escape from conÞnement; to utter; to pour forth; as, to vent passion or complaint.
The queen of heav'n did thus her fury vent. 3. To utter; TO REPORT… 4. TO PUBLISH. The
sectators did greatly enrich their inventions by venting the stolen treasures of divine letters.
[Not used.] 5. TO SELL. Therefore did those nations vent such spice. [Not in use.] [Instead of
vent in the latter sense, we use VEND. - verb intransitive - TO SNUFF. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

INVENTION - noun - [Latin inventio.] 1. The action or operation of FINDING OUT

SOMETHING NEW; THE CONTRIVANCE OF THAT WHICH DID NOT BEFORE EXIST;
as the invention of logarithms; the invention of the art of printing; the invention of the orrery.
Invention differs from discovery. INVENTION IS APPLIED TO THE CONTRIVANCE
AND PRODUCTION OF SOMETHING THAT DID NOT BEFORE EXIST. DISCOVERY
BRINGS TO LIGHT THAT WHICH EXISTED BEFORE, BUT WHICH WAS NOT KNOWN.
We are indebted to invention for the thermometer and barometer. We are indebted to discovery
for the knowledge of the isles in the PaciÞc ocean, and for the knowledge of galvanism, and
many species of earth not formerly known. This distinction is important, though not always
observed. 2. That which is invented. The cotton gin is the invention of Whitney; the steam
boat is the invention of Fulton. The Doric, Ionic and Corinthian orders are said to be inventions
of the Greeks; the Tuscan and Composite are inventions of the Latins. 3. FORGERY; FICTION.
FABLES ARE THE INVENTIONS OF INGENIOUS MEN. 4. In painting, the Þnding or
choice of the objects which are to enter into the composition of the piece. 5. In poetry, it is
applied to whatever the poet adds to the history of the subject. 6. In rhetoric, the Þnding and
selecting of arguments to prove and illustrate the point in view. 7. The power of inventing;
that skill or ingenuity which is or may be EMPLOYED IN CONTRIVING ANY THING
NEW. Thus we say, a man of invention. 8. Discovery; the Þnding of things hidden or before
unknown. [Less proper.] (Webs1828)

—=—

YouÕve probably never noticed that your birth certiÞcate is printed on a bank note. Mine, for in-
stance, states at the bottom ÒMIDWEST BANK NOTE COMPANYÓ as its origin, and the Arms of
the United States is of course embossed and displayed ofÞcially in a raised SEAL. For that person is
the son of the state (Caesar’s district), created and borne into legal existence by it. It retains no
blood, and therefore has no blood right. It is merely a commercial paper. The seal represents the
Arms of the United States, the persons Òfather.Ó

This commercial paper falsely re-presents GodÕs Creation of blood into a Þctional personiÞcation,
and the man must therefore carry that false persona with him in the form of identiÞcation; a token

!871
of his permanent state of false being in the sin of Þction. In other words, we undertake to carry
(bear) our person in commerce, and a person of the United States is required by law to bear the
Arms (ßag and seal) of that government corporation, not those of his blood kin or of his State
(People).

—=—

“…in the arcanum of magic it is declared that ‘HE CONTROLS THE

SOUL WHO CONTROLS THE BLOOD OF ANOTHER’…”

“Though the demonism of the Middle Ages seems to have disappeared,

there is abundant evidence that in many forms of modern thought —
especially the so-called "prosperity" philosophy, "will-power building"
metaphysics, and systems of "high-pressure" salesmanship — black
magic has merely passed through a metamorphosis, and ALTHOUGH
ITS NAME BE CHANGED ITS NATURE REMAINS THE SAME.”


—Manly P. Hall, “Ceremonial Sorcery And Magic”


—=—

We are the carriers of commercial vessels called citizen-ships. We are borne citizens at the
registration of our birth, which is the Þgurative (legal) seizure of our blood through word magic.
And the only remedy to this nightmare of Þctional re-presentation is to be re-born (as ÒChristiansÓ
call it) into Nature, back into our origin of blood and Spirit and Source under God (Jehovah). Until
we shed ourselves of all simulation through the magic of artiÞce and Þction, until we shed our
straw, we voluntarily give up our right to bear our bloodline right in the Arms of heraldry and
instead bear the Great Seal of the United States as our ÒfatherÓ and ÒfamilyÓ upon a paper straw-
man persona, which we carry and bear as our burden in commerce (artiÞce of mammon).

BORN - participle passive - of bear. Baurn. BROUGHT FORTH, AS AN ANIMAL. A very

useful distinction is observed by good authors, who, in the sense of produced or brought
forth, write this word born; but in the sense of CARRIED, write it BORNE. This difference
of orthography renders obvious the difference of pronunciation. 1. To be born is to be
produced or brought into life. 'Man is born to trouble.' A man born a prince or a beggar. It is
followed by OF, BEFORE THE MOTHER OR ANCESTORS. Man that is born of woman is
of few days and full of trouble. Job 14:1. 2. TO BE BORN OR BORN AGAIN, IS TO BE
REGENERATED AND RENEWED; TO RECEIVE SPIRITUAL LIFE. John 3:3. (Webs1828)

BORNE - participle passive - of bear. CARRIED; CONVEYED; SUPPORTED; defrayed. - noun

- The more correct orthography of bourn, A LIMIT OR BOUNDARY. [See Bourn.] (Webs1828)

BOURN, rather BORNE - noun - 1. A BOUND; A LIMIT. THAT UNDISCOVERED

COUNTRY, from whose bourn, no traveller returns. 2. A brook; a torrent; a rivuletÉ
(Webs1828)

TORRENT - noun - [Latin torrens. This is the participle of torreo, to parch; Eng. tear.] 1. A
violent rushing stream OF WATER or other ßuid; a stream suddenly raised and running
rapidly, as down a precipice; as a torrent of lava. 2. A violent or rapid stream; a strong current;
AS A TORRENT OF VICES AND FOLLIES; A TORRENT OF CORRUPTION. Erasmus,
that great injur'd NAME, Stemm'd the wild torrent of a barb'rous age. - adjective - Rolling or
rushing in a rapid stream; as waves of torrent Þre. (Webs1828)

!872
CURRENT - adjective - [Latin, to ßow or run.] 1. Literally, ßowing, running, passing. Hence,
passing from person to person, or from hand to hand; circulating; as CURRENT
OPINIONS; CURRENT COIN. Hence, COMMON, general or fashionable; generally
received; POPULAR; as the current notions of the day or age; current folly. 2. ESTABLISHED
BY COMMON ESTIMATION; generally received; as the current value of coin. 3. Passable;
that may be ALLOWED OR ADMITTED. 4. Now passing; present in its course; as the
current month or year. - noun - 1. A ßowing or passing; a stream; applied to ßuids; as a current
of water, or of air. The gulf stream is a remarkable current in the Atlantic. A current sets into
the Mediterranean. 2. COURSE; progressive motion, or movement; CONTINUATION; AS
THE CURRENT OF TIME. 3. A connected series; successive course; as the current of
EVENTS. 4. General or main course; as the current of opinion. (Webs1828)

CURRENCY - noun - [See CURRENT.] 1. Literally, ßowing, running or passing; a continued

or uninterrupted COURSE, like that of a stream; as the CURRENCY OF TIME. 2. A
CONTINUED COURSE IN PUBLIC OPINION, BELIEF OR RECEPTION; A PASSING
FROM PERSON TO PERSON, OR FROM AGE TO AGE; as, a report has had a long or
general currency. 3. A CONTINUAL PASSING FROM HAND TO HAND, as coin or bills of
credit; CIRCULATION; as the currency of cents, or of English crowns; the currency of bank
bills or treasury notes. 4. Fluency; readiness of utterance; but in this sense we generally use
ßuency. 5. General estimation; the rate at WHICH ANY THING IS GENERALLY VALUED.
He takes greatness of kingdoms according to their bulk and currency and not after intrinsic
value. 6. That which is current or in circulation, as a medium of TRADE. The word may be
applied to coins, or to bills issued by authority. It is often applied to BANK NOTES, and to
notes ISSUED by government. (Webs1828)

RUN - verb - To have CURRENCY OR LEGAL VALIDITY IN A PRESCRIBED TERRITORY;

as, the writ runs throughout the county. To have applicability or LEGAL EFFECT DURING A
PRESCRIBED PERIOD OF TIME; as, the statute of limitations has run against the claim. TO
FOLLOW OR ACCOMPANY; TO BE ATTACHED TO ANOTHER THING IN PURSUING
A PRESCRIBED COURSE OR DIRECTION; as, the covenant runs with the land. To conduct,
manage, CARRY ON. (Black4)

SERIES - noun - [Latin this word probably belongs to the Shemetic, the primary sense of which
is to stretch or STRAIN.] 1. A CONTINUED SUCCESSION IN THE THINGS OF THE
SAME ORDER, AND BEARING THE SAME RELATION TO EACH OTHER; AS A SERIES
OF KINGS; A SERIES OF SUCCESSORS. 2. Sequence; order; course; succession of things; as
a series of calamitous events. 3. In natural history, an order or subdivision of SOME CLASS
OF NATURAL BODIES. 4. In arithmetic and algebra, a number of terms in succession,
increasing or diminishing in a certain ratio; as arithmetical series and geometrical series. [See
Progression.] (Webs1828)

CURRENT OBLIGATIONS - The word "current" means passing in time or BELONGING TO

THE TIME actually passing, now passing, PRESENT IN ITS COURSE, as the current month,
and as applied to CURRENT OBLIGATIONS it denotes the obligations then passing or
present in its progress, THE SERVICE RENDERED AND THE COMPENSATION
THEREFOR MEASURED BY THE TIME OF THE OCCURRENCE OF THE EVENT. (Black4)

BORROWE - In old Scotch law. A PLEDGE. (Black4)

BORROWER - He to whom a thing is lent AT HIS REQUEST. UNDER USURY STATUTE,

one having THE USE OF MONEY BY FORBEARANCE OF HIS CREDITOR, OR ANY
PERSON WHO SECURES THE USE OF MONEY in any way upon an excessive
consideration; the party who is BOUND BY ORIGINAL CONTRACT TO PAY LOAN; the
purchaser of land SUBJECT TO USURIOUS MORTGAGE and subsequent mortgagees;
THE INDORSER OF NOTE who received no part of money advanced and WHO WAS
MERE SURETY. (Black4)

!873
 FORBEARANCE - Act by which creditor waits for payment of debt due him by debtor after
it becomes due. A DELAY IN ENFORCING RIGHTS. Refraining from action. The term is
used in this sense in general jurisprudence, in contradistinction to “act.” WITHIN USURY
LAW, term signiÞes CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION OF LENDER OR CREDITOR TO
REFRAIN, DURING GIVEN PERIOD OF TIME, from requiring borrower or debtor to
repay loan or debt then due and payable. (Black4)

USURY - Modern Law. An ILLEGAL contract for a loan or FORBEARANCE of money,

goods, or things in action, by which illegal interest is reserved, or agreed to be reserved or
taken. An unconscionable and exorbitant rate or amount of interest. AN UNLAWFUL
CONTRACT UPON THE LOAN OF MONEY, to receive the same again with exorbitant
increase. The reserving and taking, or contracting to reserve and take, either directly or by
indirection, a greater sum for the USE of money than the lawful interest. See, also, Usurious
Contract. "Usury" does not depend on question whether the lender actually gets more than the
legal rate of interest or not: but on whether there was a purpose in his mind to make more
than legal interest for the use of money, and whether, by the terms of the transaction, and the
means used to effect the loan, he may by its enforcement be enabled to get more than the
legal rate. A proÞt greater than the lawful rate of interest, intentionally EXACTED as a
BONUS, FOR THE FORBEARANCE OF AN EXISTING INDEBTEDNESS or a loan of
money, imposed upon the necessities of the BORROWER in a transaction where the money
is to be returned at all events. Old English Law. Interest of money; increase for the loan of
money; A REWARD FOR THE USE OF MONEY. THE TAKING OF ANY
COMPENSATION WHATEVER FOR THE USE OF MONEY. (Black4)

—=—

We are periodically charged Þnes and fees and other exactions (extortions), not because govern-
ment is a tyranny, but because we voluntarily borrow its personhood and spend our Lives off
course, paying for its forbearance of our debts. Government, as creditor, and as the origin of
conspiracy, of course may charge unlawful usury without fear of lawful punishment. The punisher
never punishes himself. The king never turns upon his own crown. And as long as we pay these
rents in tribute to the constituted, sovereign magistracy, as long as government is in receivership of
these taxes as protection money in exaction, we are left to our civil, public ad-ventures. But for this
usurious privilege of contract we pay the price of usury because we exist in pre-tended indebted-
ness to the creator magistrates of persons, for we are not at rest in God but instead sailing its
citizen-ship in a commercial incorporation, never Þxed to the land. Our souls are tied up in bond-
age, mixed and grafted with the artiÞce; acting as sureties for its proÞts in its permanently
bankrupt debt system.

TRIBUTE - A CONTRIBUTION which is raised by a prince or sovereign from his subjects

to sustain the expenses of the state. A sum of money PAID BY AN INFERIOR sovereign or
state to a superior potentate, TO SECURE THE FRIENDSHIP OR PROTECTION OF THE
LATTER. (Black1)

TRIBUTE - A contribution which is sometimes RAISED BY THE SOVEREIGN FROM HIS

SUBJECT, to sustain the expenses of the state. It is also a sum of money paid by one nation
to another UNDER SOME PRETENDED RIGHT. (Bouv1856)

CONTRIBUTIONS - Public law. TAXES or money contributed to the support of the

government. 2. Contributions are of three kinds, namely: Þrst, those which arise from persons
on account of their property, real or personal, or which are imposed upon their industry -
those which are laid on and paid by real estate WITHOUT REGARD TO ITS OWNER; and -
those to which personal property is subject, in its transmission from hand to hand,
WITHOUT REGARD TO THE OWNER… 3. This is a generic term which INCLUDES ALL
KINDS OF IMPOSITIONS FOR THE PUBLIC BENEFIT. See Duties; Imports; Taxes. 4. By
contributions is also meant FORCED levy of money or property by a belligerent in a hostile

!874
 country which he occupies, BY WHICH MEANS THE COUNTRY IS MADE TO
CONTRIBUTE to the support of the army of occupation. These contributions are usually
TAKEN INSTEAD OF PILLAGE. (Bouv1856)

—=—

“And he said, My presence shall go with thee, 


and I will give thee rest.”
—Exodus 33:14, KJB

—=—

The use of these terms of volunteerism can be confusing, but the doctrine of master and servant
(volunteerism) does not pretend the notion of choice, rather that these “contributions” such as tax
and other extortion and exactions that all public subjects pay to their masters are the result of said
initial act of volunteerism. We are birthed into this legal matrix, and conÞrm that act by our use of
its surname, signature, and other identity-based beneÞts. If itÕs still unclear how force may be used
within such a voluntary society as this US public citizenship, consider for a moment a ÒvoluntaryÓ
military service contract. One does not enter the military as a volunteer, one volunteers to enter the
military and be bound to its separate system of law under contract and strict law. The volunteerism
was an action pre-contract. The soldier does not attempt to use his volunteerism to bypass any
military codes, for that would be ridiculous. One does not retain any choice to resist while under
contract law, until that contract is executed. Citizenship is no different, being the result of a
previous action of voluntary consent and a continuing result of silence thereto. What is avoidable
by correct choice and end of contract is not a tyranny, it is the essence of volunteerism. And
volunteers will be violently forced to contribute to the public, legal Þction, paying tribute to exactly
the artiÞcial god in mammon they have chosen and made election of. For itÕs the person, not the
man, that must pay tribute. And if the person does not pay, the surety for that person, the man, will
be punished for such negligence of contract.

Just remember that every tax you pay is an act of voluntary contribution, and that you are funding
this international, commercial war machine through your taxed volunteerism. But do not be con-
fused in any way, for your contributions are not a choice, because slaves, even voluntary ones,
simply donÕt have a choice.

It is interesting to note here that the word Noah in the Bible translates to being at Òrest.Ó And of
course Þguratively, the three states of unrest or sons (states of being) of Noah are Seth (name), Ham
(red, angry), and Japheth (gullibility). The gullible (generally common caucasoid/Eropid peoples)
are ruled by the tribe of the name (genealogy, as the keepers of records of blood inheritance/land-
holders), and pitted against the tribe of Ham (the passionate and angry) Middle Eastern peoples
under the doctrine of the Quran. No rest is allowed, no peace between nations of goyim. Noah is
out to Sea! We will discover more on this Þgurative nature of the word tribe and the True meanings
of all the names in the Bible later. For now, merely realize that every character in the Bible is but a
Þgurative personiÞcation and story of you, of your potential in both glory, grace, and in corruption.
These are not historical Þgures, they are character lessons to be learned through trials that can be
avoided by the understanding of their individual stories in scritpure. Just look at everything that
Noah had to go through just to be at rest, and you will begin to understand the Nature of your own
journey towards the even higher, ultimate example of the Lawful man of God.

To rest on the Sabbath day, the 7th Òday,Ó in honor of the Nature of Jehovah and to give Its fallow
Þelds and Its wondrous beasts of burden restÉ that was the commandment of scripture, as Jubilee.
But the legal Land-Lords in their Judaic (Old) Law altered that perfect rationality of Natural action
under the Supreme Law of Jehovah yet again into a ceremonial, customary replacement of that
Natural Law of God. They turned the verb (action of) “rest” into a conceptual noun of Þction

!875
(religion) and usury, into a charge of extortion (exaction). They made rest into a fee of penalty. They
turned man’s place in Nature as his “interest” in Jehovah and in himself and his own blood kin into
a monetary consideration of interest upon his forbearing-of-God and debt obligation to man as
god-kings; the land-lords of government. Of course, no man of God would dare to pay interest to
another man, for his interests would be solely in serving all men and God in Natural substance, not
by the artiÞcial and pointless form of mammon (money). OneÕs Life is only Lived to honor and
please God’s Nature in reciprocality for the abundance of that beautiful, edible shelter of Nature. A
man of God would never put himself into the debt and surety of another, as the ancient wisdom of
the scriptures instruct him to at all times avoid such misadventures that he would surely smart for.
For his creditor will become his false god, his idol, and his law-maker, just as the nations and their
idolatrous gods. Here again we see the word-smiths magically recreating God’s prescribed
teachings of rest and interest into nothing more than Þctions of the usurious legal code and system
of pirates. Just as man’s person is built upon the back of and collateralized in mammon, so too shall
man pay tribute for that person’s anthropomorphized interest in mammon, so that the god of
mammon shall rest in the sight of the ÒpeaceÓ of its free-ßowing commerce, ruling in supremacy
over the land by ßooding it with that virtual, legal sea of false legalistic valuation.

Perhaps nothing strikes this author as more ridiculous in the false corporate “Christian” dialectic
(fallacious logic) than the notion of “resting” on Sundays only, of going to a corporate church in
some masonic temple or building as if that fulÞlls some obligation to God. It does not. It is not an
instruction in the Bible. It is an affront upon the Word. For to participate in evil, in mammon, in
commerce six days a week and then pretend to be holy only one day per week is the epitome of
ignorance. Nowhere does the Word of God say be evil and ignore the Higher Law except on the
Sabbath day once a week. This is the perfect example of the sheer irrational behavior caused by the
priest-class, pharisees, the gods of nations, and the usurious changers of money. This concept is
about as oxymoronic as a bank holiday (holy day). Imagine that, a banker in mammon celebrating
Christmas… How absurd!

And so, through these corporate institutions of religion, both Catholic (universal) and its protestors
(Protestants), we Þnd a pointless argument based on the Roman Catholic calendar, a creation of
man. For as a legal corporation based in mammon (money) and instituted under the legal laws of
the state, the idea of the Sabbath must also be made to conform with the ideals of mammon, to the
5 day work-week of legal debt slaves, turning the holy “day” into a vulgar conceptualization of a
spiritual vacation from the normalized, everyday sin (syn) committed by the common man in the
name of the gods of the state (deiÞed, artiÞcial person) every week. Should the Sabbath take place
once a week on the Roman Saturday (Saturn worship) or on the Roman Sunday (Sun worship)?

—=—


“But the mark of the beast can only be deÞned by the beast itself, AND
THE BEAST, ACCORDING TO THE PROPHECY, IS THE PAPAL
SYSTEM. So they will have to tell us what their mark is. AND THEY DO,
in no uncertain terms… The Sabbath gives authority to GodÕs Law… SO
WHEN YOU TOUCH THE SABBATH, YOU TOUCH THE AUTHORITY
OF GOD.”



—Walter Veith, excerpt from ‘Amazing Discoveries’ lecture series.

—=—

“THE POPE REPRESENTS JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF…”

—Excerpt of a letter written from Cardinal Giuseppe Sarto (who became Pope Pius X in 1903) to Don Marino, as quoted in ‘Publications of the Catholic Truth
Society’ Volume 29 (Catholic Truth Society: 1896)

—=—

!876
 —=—

“…for thou art our shepherd, thou art our physician, thou art our
governor, thou art our husbandman, THOU ART FINALLY ANOTHER
GOD ON EARTH”

—Christopher Marcellus addressing Pope Julius II during the Fifth Lateran Council which began in 1512, as quoted in Alexander Hislop, The light of prophecy let
in on the dark places of the papacy (London: William Whyte and Co., 1846): 91 and Letters between a Catholic and a Protestant on the doctrines of the Church of
Rome originally published in Borrow's Worcester Journal (Worcester Journal, 1827)

—=—

“SUNDAY IS OUR MARK OF AUTHORITY… THE CHURCH IS

ABOVE THE BIBLE, and this transference of Sabbath observance is
proof of that fact.”



—Catholic Record, Sept. 1st, 1923

—=—




“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act…
And the act is A MARK OF HER ECCLESIASTICAL POWER AND
AUTHORITY in religious matters.”



—Excerpt from a letter written October 28, 1895, by C.F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons

—=—

“We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church

transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.”
—‘The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine,’ 1957 (page 50)

—=—

“[Not the Creator of the Universe, in Genesis 2:1-3, but the Catholic
Church] can claim the honor of having granted man a pause to his work
every seven days.”
—S.C. Mosna, ‘Storia della Domenica,’ 1969, (pages 366-367)

—=—

“Reason and common sense demand the acceptance of One or the other
of these alternatives: EITHER PROTESTANTISM AND THE KEEPING
OF SATURDAY, OR CATHOLICITY AND THE KEEPING HOLY OF
SUNDAY. Compromise is impossible.”
—Excerpt from ‘The Catholic Mirror,’ December 23, 1893

—=—

!877
 —=—

“SUNDAY IS A CATHOLIC INSTITUTION AND ITS CLAIMS TO

OBSERVANCE CAN BE DEFENDED ONLY ON CATHOLIC
PRINCIPLES… From the beginning to the end of Scripture there is not a
single passage which warrants the transfer of weekly public worship
from the last day of the week to Þrst.Ó
—Catholic Press (Sydney), August 25, 1900

—=—

“In other words, the world will be brought to a point where they will
have to CHOOSE BETWEEN THE AUTHORITY OF GOD AND
KEEPING THE SABBATH, OR THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH
AND KEEPING THE SUNDAY.Ó
—Walter Veith, excerpt from ‘Amazing Discoveries’ lecture series.

—=—

“SUNDAY IS FOUNDED NOT ON SCRIPTURE, BUT ON

TRADITION, AND IS A DISTINCTLY CATHOLIC INSTITUTION.Ó
—Catholic Record, Sept. 17, 1893

—=—

“If you consider Sunday to be the Sabbath, YOU ARE SUBSCRIBING

TO THE BABYLONIAN RELIGION.Ó
—Milton William “Bill” Cooper, (1943-2001)

—=—

“But he (Jesus christ) answered and said unto them, WHY DO YE ALSO
TRANSGRESS THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD BY YOUR
TRADITION? …THUS HAVE YE MADE THE COMMANDMENT OF
GOD OF NONE EFFECT BY YOUR TRADITION. YE HYPOCRITES,
well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto
me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; BUT THEIR
HEART IS FAR FROM ME. BUT IN VAIN THEY DO WORSHIP ME,
TEACHING FOR DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN.Ó


—Matthew 15: 3 and 6-9 (9 repeated), KJB


—=—

!878
Who wins the debate? Nobody, of course! For the foundation of the argument is ßawed, the mean-
ing of the word purposefully mistranliterated for the masses of modern illiterate, dog-Latin goyim.

The word Sabbath comes from the root of Strong's H7673 - shabath, which is translated into the
English words rest, rested (as when God rested on the seventh “day” of creation), cease, put away,
put down, to be lacking, celebrate, keep, rid, make, to exterminate, to destroy, to cause to desist,
to cause to fail, etc… There is the Sabbatical Year, in which the lands are not plowed, and the
Sabbatical week for different cultures. Generally, this is an old-Testament Jewish term that can, in
manÕs vulgarity of legal law, only be utilized politically in a usurious, money-based labor and/or
slave labor economy. Its Spirit of intent has been lost, delegated to a literalist translation based on
the Roman calendar.

SABBATIC, SABBATICAL - adjective - 1. PERTAINING TO the sabbath. 2. RESEMBLING

the sabbath; enjoying or bringing an intermission of labor. Sabbatical year, IN THE
JEWISH ECONOMY, WAS EVERY SEVENTH YEAR, IN WHICH THE ISRAELITES WERE
COMMANDED TO SUFFER THEIR FIELDS AND VINEYARDS TO REST, OR LIE
WITHOUT TILLAGE, and the year next following every seventh sabbatical year in
succession, that is, EVERY FIFTIETH YEAR, WAS THE JUBILEE, which was also A YEAR
OF REST TO THE LANDS, and a year of redemption or release. Leviticus 15:1. (Webs1828)

—=—

Of course, when we see that this word “day” is yet another obfuscating word used in the King’s
dog-Latin confusion of terms of art, we may take a whole new meaning from this word, which
Þguratively may mean anything from a day to a year to a lifetime, and even as an entire age. The
rigmarole of this 7 day schedule has nothing of the spirit within its design, the modern calendar of
course being a Roman creation. Only he who is unspiritually Þxed in the pursuit of worldly
possessions via the vessel and misadventure of commercial citizen-ship would suffer such a
schedule of tolerated corruption of mind, capitalist employment (use) of the body, and an accepted,
indiscriminate perversion of the soul.

Did Jesus the christ follow this Jewish custom in mammon? Was christ somehow, oxymoronically a
Jew? Did he follow the purely secularized, Jewish tradition of the Sabbath?

—=—

“And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him,
BECAUSE HE HAD DONE THESE THINGS ON THE SABBATH
DAY.”
—John 5:16, KJB

—=—

“And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is
it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? And they held their peace. And he
took him, and healed him, and let him go; And answered them, saying,
Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not
straightway pull him out on the sabbath day? And they could not
answer him again to these things.”
—Luke 14: 3-6, KJB

—=—

!879
 —=—

“And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the Þrst, that he went
through the corn Þelds; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and
did eat, rubbing them in their hands. And certain of the Pharisees said
unto them, Why do ye that which is NOT LAWFUL to do on the sabbath
days? And Jesus answering them said, HAVE YE NOT READ SO
MUCH AS THIS, WHAT DAVID DID, WHEN HIMSELF WAS AN
HUNGRED, AND THEY WHICH WERE WITH HIM; How he went into
the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to
them that were with him; WHICH IT IS NOT LAWFUL TO EAT BUT
FOR THE PRIESTS ALONE?”
—Luke 6: 1-4, KJB

—=—

Now itÕs your turn, you of the so-called ÒChristianÓ ßattering title and that bears the empty symbol
of the cross… Have you not read what David did? Have you not read what christ did over and
over in respect of the Pure and permanent Sabbath in spite of the Jewish priest-class and Pharisees
of the old Law and purely Babylonian religious-based tradition? Do you not see that even christ
was trying to parabolically talk sense into you? Do you not see that your work in legality and
mammon is not acceptable on any day or at any time, in the Þgurative eyes of GodÕs Nature and
Law, for it beneÞts not GodÕs kingdom nor protects its Nature and Design? Can you not see that the
legal custom of keeping the Sabbath is merely an excuse by the ecclesia and corporate church and
state to cause men to sin (to go against GodÕs law) the other 6 days a week?

If all days are Sabbath, if the Sabbath is Eternal, what need is there of manÕs artful world, debt
instruments, and law, and how does one justify such a Þctional license from GodÕs Law every other
day but ÒSunday,Ó like a Roman holiday?

It is important to understand here that the word Sabbath differs from the biblical word sabbaton,
which is not spiritual or of God in any way. Jesus the christos then exclaims the following:

—=—

“And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the
sabbath.”
—Luke 6:5, KJB

—=—

But how can this be, unless the word here used is not the word Sabbath (capitalized), but instead
the uncapitalized or general meaning of the word in manÕs legal domain? And thatÕs exactly what
we Þnd, another confusing transliteration from the king (false god and lord). Here, a different word
is intended, which is Strong's G4521 - σάββατον, or sabbaton. And, of course, we Þnd this term to be
intended as exactly what we would expect of those adversaries and false gods of mammon. The
word sabbaton is strictly a secular, legalistic word of Hebrew origin, with no spiritual, Higher Law
aspect to it at all.

!880
Sabbaton is deÞned as Òthe Sabbath (i.e., Shabbath), OR DAY OF WEEKLY REPOSE FROM
SECULAR AVOCATIONS (also the observance or institution itself); by extension, a se'nnight,
i.e., the interval between two Sabbaths; likewise the plural in all the above applications:Ñsabbath
(day), week.



And StongÕs outline of Biblical usage for this mistransliterated word are as follows:

G4521 - σάββατον, or sabbaton



1. THE SEVENTH DAY OF EACH WEEK which was A SACRED FESTIVAL on which THE
ISRAELITES WERE REQUIRED TO ABSTAIN FROM ALL WORK.

A. THE INSTITUTION of the sabbath, THE LAW for keeping holy every seventh day of
the week.

B. A single sabbath, sabbath day.

2. Seven days, a week.

Ñ=Ñ

With a bit of further due diligence, we Þnd this to be a strictly Jewish, Talmudic (civil law) legal
concept only, including the law of a sabbath-day’s journey, deÞned in TheyerÕs Greek Lexicon as Òthe
distance it is lawful to travel on the sabbath-day or sabbaton according to the Talmud,Ó being Òtwo-
thousand cubits or paces.Ó

In comparison, the secular sabbaton of the Jew is to the actual holy Sabbath of God what the day
Sunday is to the timelessness of GodÕs Word/Law. It is ritualistic, secular nonsense that pretends to
replace the Reality of the keeping of True Law at all times. It is like attending a weekly, ritualistic
church service to pay for your sins the rest of the week. And it is utterly ridiculous in the parabolic
stories of christ.

As Mr. Veith, a ÒSeventh Day AdventistÓ is quoted as saying above, the choice is GodÕs Sabbath or
RomeÕs careener day of the week as a sabbatic mark of authority over GodÕs Word/Law/Son. But
the answer is not to worship Saturn (Saturday) as the one day out of seven to act christlike, but to
worship all days and all times as Sabbath without error or exception, without license or popish
indulgences, and without secular logic or ritual pomp and circumstance. The Sabbath is not a
sabbatical from a sinful agency with devilÕs (attorneys) once per week, but a permanent Lifestyle
that defeats those devils, the artiÞcers and their schemes.

Remember, the new Law (Son) fulÞlls the old Law. The Sabbath as the secularized sabbaton is the
old Law, and is based solely on commercial enterprise, a ceasing of paid or involuntary slave-labor
as a day of legal rest. It has its basis, in other words, on nothing of christÕs teachings. This is to say
that if men were acting piously in Pure Charitably and at all times in Love and in the Grace of
GodÕs Nature and Law, the Sabbath would be a pointless custom, for it would never end. For there
is nothing of GodÕs commandments that would be outlawed on the Jewish Sabbath. Charity is not
an employment, it is a permanent Lifestyle. One would not cease to be Charitable in all things and
works every day but the sabbaton. One that is a son of God needs no Sabbath, for every day is
Sabbath. And so I am sorry, but if you believe in and utilize this old Law of commerce, be it
Saturday or Sunday or any day, month, or year, you are just not what you think you are. GodÕs Law
is not to be turned on and off like a Light-switch. All days are, and all Being is of Jehovah. Every
second of every day and in every aspect of oneÕs Life is to be kept as the Sabbath. And most
importantly, money in any form can hold no place in the Sabbath.

Ultimately, the ridiculousness of the situation boils down to this: either you will sin Monday thru
Saturday and keep Sunday as GodÕs day or you will protest and sin instead Sunday through Friday
and keep Saturday alone for the Law and works of God. This is patently idiotic. For what christ is

!881
attempting to teach the Pharisees and lawyers above is a timeless lesson, that work (employments)
in man’s system of law and commerce are opposed to the works of the followers of christ (God’s
Law/Word/Son). It is not work to save a Life, but part of the works of Pius men under Jehovah. It is
not work to feed the hungry, but the required and expected timeless works of all men of God. We
are not to work against God all the days of the week, and only on the seventh day of the Roman
calendar week rest from our sins. This is certainly not a commandment of God, to sin 6 of 7 days
just so that one may keep the separate, Sabbath day holy. Nor can any man possibly think this to be
a reasonable custom for men of christ’s teachings under the New Testament, now that this
ludicrous idea of a “Sabbath day” in the time domain of strictly commercial Roman law is no
longer occulted from one’s Natural Reason. The debate is absolutely, 100% fallacious. It is a
religious and legal debate, not a spiritual one under the Law of God’s Nature.

—=—

“Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the
sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it?”
—Luke 6:9, KJB

—=—

With his interest laid Þrmly upon the legalistic dependence of money, manÕs stake in Jehovah and
the True Nature of keeping the Sabbath holy is of course lost. For his stake (cross) becomes paper
thin in form only and without any anchor to the land (to God, to Reality). Our notion of what rest is
has been transliterated into a commercial term of art, a simulation of the Real. Noah was Truly at
rest with God, for he wrestled not against the Law of God. The word Noah means “rest.” We,
however, are all parabolically lost at sea without an ark of the covenant.

From action (verb) to Þction (noun)É

RESTS - noun - Periodical BALANCING’S OF AN ACCOUNT, (particularly in mortgage and

trust accounts), made for the purpose of CONVERTING INTEREST INTO PRINCIPAL, and
CHARGING THE PARTY LIABLE thereon with compound interest. (Black4)

INTEREST - verb transitive - [Latin inter and esse.] 1. To concern; TO AFFECT; to excite
emotion or passion, usually in favor, but SOMETIMES AGAINST A PERSON OR THING.
A narration of suffering interests us in favor of the sufferer. We are interested in the story or
in the fate of the sufferer. We are interested to know the result, ISSUE or EVENT of an
ENTERPRISE. It is followed by in or for. We are interested in the narration, but for the
sufferer. 2. TO GIVE A SHARE IN. Christ, by his atonement, has INTERESTED BELIEVERS
in the blessings of THE COVENANT OF GRACE. 3. TO HAVE A SHARE. We are not all
interested in the public funds, but we are all interested in the happiness of a free
government. 4. TO ENGAGE; as, to interest one in our favor. TO INTEREST ONE'S SELF,
IS TO TAKE A SHARE OR CONCERN IN - noun - Concern; advantage; good; as PRIVATE
INTEREST; PUBLIC INTEREST. Divisions hinder the common interest and public good. 1.
INFLUENCE OVER OTHERS. They had now lost their interest at court. He knew his interest
sufÞcient to procure the ofÞce. 2. SHARE; PORTION; PART; PARTICIPATION IN VALUE.
He has parted with his interest in the stocks. He has an interest in a manufactory of cotton
goods. 3. Regard to PRIVATE proÞt. 'Tis interest calls off all her sneaking train. 4. PREMIUM
PAID FOR THE USE OF MONEY; the proÞt per cent derived from money lent, OR
PROPERTY USED BY ANOTHER PERSON, OR FROM DEBTS REMAINING UNPAID.
Commercial states have a legal rate of interest. Debts on book BEAR an interest after the
expiration of the credit. Courts allow interest in many cases where it is not stipulated. A
higher rate of interest than that which THE LAW ALLOWS, is called usury. Simple interest

!882
 is that which arises from the principal sum only. Compound interest is that which arises from
the principal with the interest added; INTEREST ON INTEREST. 5. Any surplus advantage.
With all speed, you shall have your desire with interest. (Webs1828)

—=—

If a man’s interest is in money, and if everything in his purview of conscious thought is therefore to
be valued only in money, including his own life and its taxable future labor potential (actuarial),
then man’s master is obviously money (mammon). Though man may kill for money to obtain a
temporary but false sense of Þnancial freedom, he will somehow not do the same to gain his ability
to be free from that very same system of enslavement.

It is very important to know that man in person-hood and citizen-ship has not merely his every
interest in money, but that his name is only money under mammon. His signature is magically
monetized into new debt currency, creating new money from that dark void, as all money under
mammon represents only debt (to the god of nothingness). Only form, no substance, as a false god.
Money is created by man’s use of that person in ad-venture capitalism, and the creation of money
by his name (signature) upon any and every application is likened unto a virtual charge against the
christian name of Jehovah, a sacriÞce to appease the god of money so as to hold at bay the God of
Nature. Every aspect of our civil life in personhood revolves around our interest in money. And yet
the money is never ours. We have the mere privilege of use. It is only ever attached to the admixed
commercial surname. We cannot actually earn anything Naturally by using another’s political
property to receive it. What is purchased (conquered) by it therefore cannot be our own, for the
acquiring of anything by money is always false; an artiÞcial title for public use. But the public is a
domain not our own. The public owns our surname. What is received in citizenship can be
conÞscated at any time by the creator-government of that ship. And we pay a heavy price indeed,
not only by the usury charged from our mere use of another’s money (commercial paper), but in
the fact that we are the actual collateral for that money. Our names are created by and only as
monetary considerations (Þnancial instruments) for the use and creation of more money, a charge
that can never be paid back by permanent debtors with no ability to discharge our foundational,
constituted performance debt.

Without debt, however, government would cease to exist. For a constitution is a debt compact. No
debt, no constituted authorities, and no nation. Its very purpose is debt and no other. Its only
power issues from debt. Its constitution is deÞned as Òa debt compact.Ó All of its laws revolve
around debt and the foolish debtors who faithfully charge it in pledge. Its only purpose is to
service debt. It is truly a debtor’s hell with no possibility of escape under its circular system of
law…

Which is why we must overcome its artful designs and abandon its false gods.

CAPITULATION - noun - 1. The act of capitulating, or SURRENDERING to an enemy upon

stipulated terms or conditions. 2. The treaty or instrument containing the conditions of
surrender. 3. A REDUCING TO HEADS. 4. In German polity, a contract which the Emperor
makes with the electors, in the names of the princes and states of the empire, before he is
raised to the imperial dignity. (Webs1828)

—=—

Man is reduced to heads. Another word for head is capita. Man is considered per capita; per head…
just like cattle. This and the valuation and monetization of each head of chattel is called capitalism.

CAPUT - A head; THE HEAD OF A PERSON; the whole person; the life of a person; ONE'S
PERSONALITY; STATUS; CIVIL CONDITIONÉ In civil law. It signiÞed a person's civil
condition or status, AND AMONG THE ROMANS CONSISTED OF THREE
COMPONENT PARTS OR ELEMENTS, —libertas, liberty; civitas, citizenship; and familia,
family. (Black4)

!883
 CAPITA - Heads, and, Þguratively, entire bodies, WHETHER OF PERSONS OR ANIMALS.
PERSONS INDIVIDUALLY CONSIDERED, WITHOUT RELATION TO OTHERS, (polls);
as distinguished from stirpes or STOCKS OF DESCENT. The term in this sense, making part
of the common phrases, in capita, per capita, is derived from the civil law. (Black4)

PER CAPITA - By heads; by the poll; as individuals. In the distribution of an intestate's

personalty, the persons legally entitled to take are said to take per capita, that is, EQUAL
SHARES, WHEN THEY CLAIM, EACH IN HIS OWN RIGHT, AS IN EQUAL DEGREE OF
KINDRED; in contradistinction to claiming by right of representation, or per stripes. (Black4)

CAPITE - Latin. By the head. TENURE IN CAPITE was an ancient FEUDAL TENURE,
whereby a man HELD LANDS OF THE KING IMMEDIATELY. It was of two sorts: the one,
PRINCIPAL AND GENERAL, or OF THE KING AS THE SOURCE OF ALL TENURE; the
other, special and subaltern, or of a particular subject. It is now abolished. Jacob. As to
distribution per capita, see Capita, per. (Black4)

CAPITE MINUTUS - In the civil law. One who had suffered capitis diminutio, ONE WHO
LOST STATUS OR LEGAL ATTRIBUTES. (Black4)

CAPITIS DIMINUTION - In Roman law. A DIMINISHING OR ABRIDGMENT OF

PERSONALITY; A LOSS OR CURTAILMENT OF A MAN'S STATUS OR AGGREGATE OF
LEGAL ATTRIBUTES AND QUALIFICATIONS. (Black4)

—=—

What is abolished as law is often recreated through voluntary contract. Any law can be created via
contract, as long as the contract stands and all parties agree to it. And so, while direct feudalism is
certainly no longer the law, contractual feudalism by another name certainly is. ItÕs called US
citizenship. It is the nature of being a public person under an implied Òsocial contract.Ó

The public acts in capita (by the head), and so the private god ÒWe, the PeopleÓ through its
constituted government takes (taxes) per capita. The private always acts in the re-presentation of
and as a part of a bloodline of some private family or lineal stock in fabled genealogy, while the
public person in agency never acts in his own right (e.g., sui juris) or blood-right but through the
property (person) of another. In other words, the public person and thus the man standing in
surety to it is stuck in (pledged to) a modern rent, a re-presented feudatory tenancy upon the
private lands of the gods of the nation. The man in public person represents his Self as something
he his not, and certainly not by his connection of blood and Arms to some private family. His
family is in the stead of the state, that creator of publicity, the nation to which a Þctional personÕs
birth and nativity is rendered and certiÞed, and then conÞrmed and ratiÞed by the man acting
thereof in agency. The private man has no thing to render back to Caesar, for his private person
(status) is not born (rendered) by that district of seizure, distress, and distraint. The public person
shares only in the bloodless, backwards live (evil) of Þctional things.

Evil is not merely some Biblical term. In fact, it was used for a variety of ailments, diseases, and
political conditions in days of old. We forget sometimes that all the words of the Bible were in
existence long before the Bible was written, and that such existence through the magic spelling of
artful terms was certainly not in origin an English existence. A simulacra has no True source.

In its etymology, the noun evil stems from the Old English yfel. In its adjective form, this Old
English word (in Kentish being evel) meant "bad, vicious, ill, wicked," from Proto-Germanic ubilaz
and cognates: Old Saxon ubil, Old Frisian and Middle Dutch evel, Dutch euvel, Old High German
ubil, German übel, and Gothic ubils), from PIE upelo-, from root wap- "bad, evil" and as the cognate:
Hittite huwapp- "evil". In Old English and other older Germanic languages other than
Scandinavian, "this word is the most comprehensive adjectival expression of disapproval, dislike
or disparagement.Ó Evil was the word the Anglo-Saxons used where we would use bad, cruel,

!884
unskillful, defective (adjective), or harm (noun), crime, misfortune, or disease (noun). In Middle
English, BAD took the wider range of senses and EVIL BEGAN TO FOCUS ON MORAL
BADNESS. Both words have good as their opposite. In the 1520’s, evil-favored meant "ugly."
Evilchild is attested as an English SURNAME from the 13th century. The adverb is Old English
yfele, originally OF WORDS OR SPEECH. Also as a noun in Old English, "what is bad; sin,
wickedness; ANYTHING THAT CAUSES INJURY, MORALLY OR PHYSICALLY." Especially of
a malady or disease circa 1200. The meaning "extreme moral wickedness" was one of the senses of
the Old English noun, but it did not become established as the main sense of the modern word
until the 18th century. As a noun, Middle English also had evilty. Related: Evilly. Evil eye (Latin
oculus malus) was Old English eage yfel. The jocular notion of an evil twin as an excuse for
regrettable deeds is by 1986, American English, from an old motif in mythology.

Remember, the national debt is a charge equally placed upon each person individually but as one
body politic (nationalized) as well. One can only be charged with evil by evil men under evil titles
while under color of law and false (evil) authority. It is charged per head (per capita), meaning
individually. It is a capitalist system, meaning that man in persona is only considered by his capita
value (per head, as of cattle/chattel), while the group or herd is charged as merely one body politic,
or as the “general public.” The point is, that which is charged (as contracted debt, as dis-ease) can
ultimately only ever dissipate by being discharged. It cannot simply be paid with money, for it is
not only a monetary debt. It is a performance contract in persona. The performance of the pledge
must be executed to the satisfaction of the granter of the person (status). The agent must fulÞll the
charge of his agency. The strawman must pose and do the bidding of his farmer (creator). He must
please the god of his person. The charge, of course, happens at birth when that ofÞcial birth
certiÞcate as a Þnancial instrument and creation of a legal entity in Þction is monetized, creating the
wager of a hopefully conÞrmed and ratiÞed Þctional entity in mammon as a felon in franchise
(civil, commercial freedom). From this original, accidental charge of birth, like a “credit card” our
very legal existence in strawman form is continuously re-charged by the very debt of the nation.
And we can never pay off this debt, for such a debt represents the very purpose of our artiÞcial,
civil life in the invisible chains of mammon. Just as one does not escape from that scriptural hell
presented in religious lore, one does not escape this debtor’s hell while still claiming and acting in
the rights of the person-hood controlled by the devil’s of the exchequer (treasury). This is to say
that the person (status) of the state exists only in hell, and the man in surety to it cannot escape from
that debtor’s hell while legally, contractually attached in any way to that public persona. The
person lives only in hell. The man Lives only in the heaven of untouched Nature, unless he pre-
tends his Self to be some thing, some person (noun/name) in another place (legal jurisdiction) he is
not. I cannot express the importance of this realization, that it’s our very false re-presentation as a
Self-deceit and lack of True Self respect (Self-Love) that creates this hell on earth. For it is only the
Þction of men, the artiÞcial self (persona) turned into a virtual reality by our belief (love) in its
veracity and in the sovereign authority of those idolatrous gods of all the nations. The money is
representative of a non-payable debt, as a performance that can never be executed. But the money
itself is not the source of the debt, only a tool used to support its illusion. We live in agency to serve
our person’s principal. Debt is not merely the owing of money, its True purpose and intent is to
cause obligations implied in the commercial use of that money, to require contractual performance
where none would exist before, as the making of a dis-ease. Without debt, this current (currency of)
government would serve no purpose, for without such charged debtors in pledge to pay an
unplayable debt and continuously replenishing fountain of tax, no commercial system would be
needed to administer that debt and its paradoxical performance debtors. Whatever purpose or
justiÞcation the reader may put upon the use of money, we must know that Þrst and foremost
money is only an inducement to contract a legal dis-ease. Without money, weÕd have our feet Þrmly
upon the land and Live only in Reality at all times, seeking that which we need and not that for
which we merely desire. We would rely on our own land and upon others in the Purest expression
and totally unregulated Freedom of Love and Charity, not upon some conglomerate corporation in
total dependence upon the smooth and uncharitable running of the commercial debtor state. We
would be “off-grid” in the most spiritual sense of that phrase, the only meaning that counts. We
would certainly need no vessel (citizen-ship), for the sea of commerce would have dried up just as
its governing devils would have withered away, waiting to prey on the future generations of those

!885
who woke up in this one by incrementally causing their Þctional dis-ease to contractually spread
once again. To those they may make illiterate once again through their trickery and Òeducation.Ó
The franchise would be replaced by the Real thing - Natural Freedom under only GodÕs Law of
Nature by Self-governing men.

This is my dreamÉ MLK can eat my shorts!

The only way to discharge the debt is to dock the ship, to stop using that public persona (legal
status) which is thus charged, to abandon the commercial agency by abandoning the use of the
name in mammon as a tool for money management. For the debt of citizenship is a debt of
performance, not of mere money.

Consider the difference here, Þguratively, between earth and water. When we seek to ground a
charge of electricity, we literally hold it to the ground (the land) so that it is discharged. But what
happens if we are standing permanently in water, in the sea? Water is a conductor of that charge,
and therefore a man who has only legal standing in the Þctional sea of commerce with no access to
stand upon the land will continue to hold that charge of debt regardless of his beliefs. A person, as
a commercial vessel, is designed to do exactly that Ñ to hold a charge of permanent debt and
perform like the infected, dis-eased hosts for these parasites.

Thus, for this god of mammon to exist (as a lie) and thrive (subsist), it must continuously deceive us
into claiming interest in that beast system in opposition to God. We must believe in (love) it and
thus desire it. We must be separated from our very Nature, from Jehovah, from the land, so that we
may only see Nature by its false, monetary valuations. We have been made to judge all things in
the shadow of the god of mammon. And we must live in a state of permanent use, and therefore
subsist only in a simulated feudal state of usury. As we manifest that Þction in persona despite God
and Nature, we must pay interest for the very use and surety of the strawman person in sur-name,
and the only way to pay is to create new money all the time by our continuous charges via its sig-
nature. In other words, as pertaining to the citizen-ship, money becomes our nature and essence,
our building blocks, our legal (anti-Nature) DNA; for the monetized false blood of legal persons is
the currency of debt. Monetary debt is only numbers, and numbers are only the digital terms of yet
another form of coded language designed to deceive and obfuscate us from our Nature and True,
spiritual course.

Ñ=Ñ

“When there is concurrence of means, HE WHO HAS CHOSEN ONE

CANNOT HAVE RECOURSE TO ANOTHER.”
—Electa una via, non datur recursus ad alteram. 10 Toull. n. 170. (BouvMaxim)

Ñ=Ñ

God never abandons us, we merely pretend to abandon God. For we choose the Þction of mammon
as our means and therefore have no recourse to GodÕs Light and protections of Natural Law
according to the law of persons in that consented to system of mammon. Our choice, our election is
clear, for our actions in the person (property) of another expresses our consent.

We live under the laws of mammon, using and being used as money in a public, usurious contract
as permanent borrowers. We borrow for our own use the commercial person so as to have said
interest (stake) in that Þction of mammon Ñ the power to create debt as ÒcreditÓ by our signature.
Our commercial voyage re-sets our course away from GodÕs Nature and Law into the usurious
heart of evil (artiÞce, legal Þction).

!886
 —=—

“He that diligently seeketh good procureth favour: but he that seeketh
mischief, it shall come unto him. HE THAT TRUSTETH IN HIS
RICHES SHALL FALL…”
—Proverbs 11: 27-28, KJB

—=—

This word credit is yet another completely misunderstood and thus misused word by the public-
minded fools who place value on such Þctional things. And the actual meaning of this word is
unsettling to be sure, even as we bestow upon the gods of the nations a credit they do not deserve.

CREDIT - noun - [Latin, See CREED.] 1. BELIEF; FAITH; A RELIANCE OR RESTING OF

THE MIND ON THE TRUTH OF SOMETHING SAID OR DONE. WE GIVE CREDIT TO
A MAN’S DECLARATION, WHEN THE MIND RESTS ON THE TRUTH OF IT,
WITHOUT DOUBT OR SUSPICION, which is attended with wavering. We give credit to
testimony or to a report, when we rely on its truth and certainty. 2. REPUTATION
DERIVED FROM THE CONFIDENCE OF OTHERS. Esteem; estimation; GOOD OPINION
FOUNDED ON A BELIEF OF A MAN’S VERACITY, INTEGRITY, ABILITIES AND
VIRTUE; as a physician in high credit with his brethren. Hence, 3. HONOR; REPUTATION;
ESTIMATION; APPLIED TO MEN OR THINGS. A man gains no credit by profaneness; and
a poem may lose no credit by criticism. The credit of a man depends on his virtues; the credit
of his writings, on their worth. 4. That which procures or IS ENTITLED TO BELIEF;
testimony; AUTHORITY DERIVED FROM ONE’S CHARACTER, OR FROM THE
CONFIDENCE OF OTHERS. WE BELIEVE A STORY ON THE CREDIT OF THE
NARRATOR. We believe in miracles on the credit of inspired men. We trust to the credit of
assertion, made by a man of known veracity. 5. INFLUENCE DERIVED FROM THE
REPUTATION OF VERACITY OR INTEGRITY, or from the good opinion or conÞdence of
others; INTEREST; POWER DERIVED FROM WEIGHT OF CHARACTER, FROM
FRIENDSHIP, FIDELITY OR OTHER CAUSE. A minister may have great credit with a
prince. He may employ his credit TO GOOD OR EVIL PURPOSES. A man uses his credit
with a friend; A SERVANT, WITH HIS MASTER. 6. In commerce, TRUST; transfer of goods
in conÞdence of future payment. When the merchant gives a credit he sells his wares on an
expressed or implied promise that the purchaser will pay for them at a future time. The seller
believes in the solvability and probity of the purchaser, and delivers his goods on that belief
or trust; or he delivers them on the credit or reputation of the purchaser. The purchaser takes
what is sold, on credit. In like manner, money is loaned on the credit of the borrower. 7. THE
CAPACITY OF BEING TRUSTED; or the reputation of solvency and probity which entitles
a man to be trusted. A customer has good credit or no credit with a merchant. 8. In book-
keeping, the side of an account in which payment is entered; opposed to debit. This article is
carried to oneÕs credit and that to his debit. We speak of the credit side of an account. 9.
PUBLIC CREDIT THE CONFIDENCE WHICH MEN ENTERTAIN IN THE ABILITY AND
DISPOSITION OF A NATION, to make good its engagements with its creditors; or the
estimation in which individuals hold the public promises of payment, WHETHER SUCH
PROMISES ARE EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED. The term is also applied to the general credit
of individuals in a nation; when merchants and others are wealthy, and punctual in fulÞlling
engagements; or when they transact business with honor (and) Þdelity; or when transfers of
property are made with ease for ready payment. So we speak of the credit of a bank, when
general conÞdence is placed in its ability to redeem its notes; and the credit of a mercantile
house rests on its supposed ability and probity, WHICH INDUCE MEN TO TRUST TO ITS
ENGAGEMENTS. Cherish public credit. When the public credit is questionable, it raises the
premium on loans. 10. THE NOTES OR BILLS WHICH ARE ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC OR
BY CORPORATIONS OR INDIVIDUALS, WHICH CIRCULATE ON THE CONFIDENCE

!887
 OF MEN IN THE ABILITY AND DISPOSITION IN THOSE WHO ISSUE THEM, TO
REDEEM THEM. They are sometimes called bills of credit. 11. The TIME given for payment
for lands or goods sold on trust; as a long credit or a short credit. 12. A sum of money due to
any person; ANY THING VALUABLE STANDING ON THE CREDITOR SIDE OF AN
ACCOUNT. A has a credit on the books of B. The credits are more than balanced by the debits.
[In this sense, the word has the plural number.] - verb transitive - [from the Noun.] 1. TO
BELIEVE; TO CONFIDE IN THE TRUTH OF; as, to credit a report, OR THE MAN WHO
TELLS IT. 2. TO TRUST; to sell or loan in conÞdence of future payment; as, to credit goods or
money. 3. To procure credit or honor; to do credit; TO GIVE REPUTATION OR HONOR.
May here her monument stand so, to credit this rude age. 4. To enter upon the credit side of an
account; as, to credit the amount paid. 5. To set to the credit of; as, to credit to a man the
interest paid on a bond. (Webs1828)

—=—

Faith, belief, trust, conÞdenceÉ these are the essential elements that create the authority of
legalistic law and corporate religious doctrine. It is not guns or the men wielding them, for they too
must possess these same attributes regarding the Þctional issuer of their Arms and their license to
use them. Their own individual authority counts on their master’s legitimacy in the eyes of the
illegitimates who subscribe to it. And in the end, the only way to cause this to happen, this false
estimation of the worth of a nation and its sovereign (lawless) magistracy, is to cause man to see
other men as merely individual valuations of money (artiÞcial titles and statuses). Just what is a
man’s Life worth? In America, apparently the answer to that question is a paycheck of slightly
more than minimum wage plus a federal pension and quite shitty veteran’s health insurance for
the life of the “person” so entitled.

PENSIO - Latin. In the civil law. A payment, properly, for the USE OF A THING. A RENT; A
PAYMENT FOR THE USE AND OCCUPATION OF ANOTHER'S HOUSE. (Black4)

PENSION - A stated allowance out of the public treasury granted by government to an

individual, or to his representatives, FOR HIS VALUABLE SERVICES TO THE COUNTRY,
or in compensation for LOSS OR DAMAGE SUSTAINED BY HIM IN THE PUBLIC
SERVICE. "Pensions" are in the nature of BOUNTIES OF THE GOVERNMENT, WHICH IT
HAS THE RIGHT TO GIVE, WITHHOLD, DISTRIBUTE, OR RECALL AT ITS
DISCRETION. In civil, Scotch, and Spanish law. A rent; an annual rent. In English practice.
An annual payment MADE BY EACH MEMBER of the inns of court. Also an assembly of
the members of the society of Gray’s Inn, to consult of their affairs. (Black4)

PENSIONER - ONE WHO IS SUPPORTED by an allowance AT THE WILL OF ANOTHER;

A DEPENDENT. It is usually applied (in a public sense) to those who receive pensions or
annuities from government, who are chießy such as have retired FROM PLACES OF
HONOR AND EMOLUMENT. Persons making periodical payments are sometimes so
called. Thus, resident undergraduates of the university of Cambridge, who are not on the
foundation of any college, are spoken of as “pensioners.” The head of one of the Inns of Court,
otherwise the Treasurer. Pension was used to designate meetings of the Benchers in Gray's
Inn. (Black4)

PENSION - (repeated) - An allowance made to any one without an equivalent. In England, it

is generally understood to mean PAY GIVEN TO A STATE HIRELING FOR TREASON TO
HIS COUNTRY. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary of the English Language, 1755)

—=—

No public pensioner will ever admit that they are on government welfare, that they are being
supported by the state as payment for their prostituted employments (use) in support of its legal,
organized criminal ventures. Public pensions are of course merely taxpayer funded welfare for the

!888
middle class… Truth hurts, especially to those who demonize the loudest the poor, to which their
own taxpayer money as “welfare” goes to support in their destitution. God forbid that these
enfranchised charity cases, these pensioners, should be charitable to the disenfranchised.

Truth be told, these privileges received by public pensioners on the backs of all taxpayers are equal
in this public (debtor’s prison) to house privilege, to the concept of a house-slave.

Notice here the difference between a Bar attorney (e.g., a barrister of the inns of court) and the
public agent that we act in surety for as the public person (status). Both of these are agents
(attorneys), and both are pensioners, but one of them pays and one is so paid. This seemingly
trißing contemplation is actually very important.

A pension, as deÞned above, is also a form of rent. And so when it comes to a professional attorney,
an agent and ofÞcer of the courts of government and a registered and conÞrmed member of such a
legal law society thereof, the person is actually paying for the use of that title of membership. In
other words, the attorney pays a pension in order to rent his approved and legalized ßattering title
and licensure from that government and society in union. This is to say that the person must pay a
pension to use some thing belonging to another, in this case a legal status and ßattering title of
“attorney,” so that he may use that title in good standing.

So why then does government pay pensions to its public employees (hirelings)? It’s real simple…
We allow our Selves to be employed (used) by government, and so government pays its person
(property) to rent the man in surety to that person for its own evil designs. In the end, it loses
nothing for such payments, for all money that government creates is designed to eventually be
spent, taxed, and exacted back to government many times over. It may, for instance, require
through unconscionable “draft” a person to join its military. For this, it pays rent for that service to
its own person (property), which the Living man acts in surety under. And so we may say, as
deÞned by the eccentric Samuel Johnson in his own honest and quirky dictionary, that we are paid
pensions to commit treason against our country, remembering that it is the Living People, not the
legal documents or municipalities, that are the True country; just as Real People are the only Real
church, not a building or corporation in name only. To work and be pensioned to the United States
is certainly a treason against the private States (Peoples), but one protected and permitted by law.
For it was those People that created the foreign United States for the management of their goyim.
One cannot be private and public at the same time, and one cannot serve two masters (laws) at the
same time. Ultimately though, to be a pensioner of any type is always to be in blasphemy to God.
Again, this rent paid to hireling mercenaries of the state is purely an inducement to contract with
Þction and to respect the gods of that Þction as higher than Source. Without workers, the
corporation would not have Þctional life. It is to give service to, to prostitute oneself to the kingship
and in return receive rent for oneÕs body. This is a difÞcult concept, to be sure, but also vital.

The scriptures and indeed the Maxim’s as foundational principals of law in their essence tell us that
Þrst and foremost man and Nature, Being priceless under God, should never be evaluated falsely
in mammon. No price should ever purchase (conquer) a man’s morals in employment. And from
what I have come to understand, the non-valuation (causing pricelessness/Pure Love) of all Life
and the Source of It is the Þrst key to everlasting Peace and an eternal Life for all men upon this
overtly coveted but seemingly unreachable heaven on Earth.

—=—

“The human body does not admit of valuation.”

—CORPUS HUMANUM NON RECIPIT AESTIMATIONEM. Hob. 59. (Black4)

—=—

!889
 —=—

“The body of a freeman does not admit of valuation.”

—Liberum corpus aestimationem non recipit. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“That which is granted or reserved under a certain form, is not to be

drawn into a valuation.”
—Quod sub certa forma concessum vel reservatum est, non trahitur advalorem vel compensationem. Bacon's Max. Reg. 4. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“The value of A THING IS ESTIMATED BY ITS WORTH IN MONEY,

and the value of MONEY IS NOT ESTIMATED BY REFERENCE TO
ONE THING.”
—Res per pecuniam aestimatur, et non pecunia per res. 9 Co. 76; 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 922. (Black4)

—=—

“The wisdom of law CANNOT BE VALUED BY MONEY.”

—Sapientia legis nummario pretio non est aestemanda. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

These are not the principles of those who have created this system of commerce by any means,
except to say that these are the principles that they live by when dealing with themselves in privacy.
For the public though, these foundational maxims that protect the privacy of man are contractually
destroyed by those contingencies and exceptional principles of the public persona. Obviously these
maxims do not apply to slaves, be they voluntarily or involuntarily induced into that valuation of
forced “laborers.” The support and protection of the commercial institution of slavery by the united
States’ constitution tells us that these men in their private estates do not apply their own
foundational principles of law to anyone but themselves, for slavery could not exist without such
exceptions to those spiritual, scriptural rules. He who reserves his own rights under the authority
of God in privacy is the only man who may receive the beneÞt of such spiritually principled
MaximÕs of law as we have just read them. All others, literally and Þguratively, be damned. Put into
damnation. The damned nation…

Money has no value intrinsically, only when comported to other things. Thus, a private man has no
person (thing) to be valued, for his status is not commercial. To be priceless is to be Truly Free. As
for the notion that the wisdom of law is priceless, this is only in reference to private, Natural Law,
not to commercial, public law. For the principles of law always allow and protect man in his own
choice to sell his mind, body, and soul. To know the spiritual, scriptural Law necessarily causes one
to avoid all other forms of manÕs corrupted law and Þction (lies). This is the only True wisdom. But
false knowledge abounds, and so as the Bible instructs, we should avoid those who are wise only in
their own conceit, whose wisdom rests only in the false valuation of Real things, and whose source
of knowledge is only the Þctional histories and educative, institutionalized logical fallacies of man.
He who lives by the veracity of the valuation of the noun (name) of all things lives without re-
cognizing Þrst and foremost the Reality of the timeless and priceless spirit of all Creation as the
Oneness of Being, is living only in the simulacrum, the copy with no Original, with no Real Source.

!890
He values all things in money but never comprehends that money has no actual value. He under-
stands the authority of that which does not Exist. He transfers this valuelessness characteristic of
money over to that which he considers only by its perceived and entrained valuation in money,
thus worshiping all things in their adversarial (satanic), artiÞcial (artful) state before God.

We literally manifest the personiÞcation of usury openly in society (public) by our use of that
Þctional strawman, creating Þctional interest on top of Þctional debt compounded with more
interest to be added as more debt and charged more interest leading to unplayable debt slavery. Of
course, if all that debt were paid, no money would technically exist in any lawful way, for credit is
only faith-based. It is a game of conÞdence; a sham. No debt would mean no need for credit, which
would only leave room for charity. We continuously eat from that Þg-apple tree of useless concepts
in the garden (open-air prison) of credit and debt, of good and evil. We exist only as usurious
bastards in the corrupted eyes of the legal state, and so that is how we are governed (controlled).

USURA - Latin. In the civil law. Money given for the USE of money; INTEREST. Commonly
used in the plural, "usurae."(Black4)

USURA MANIFESTA - Manifest or open usury; as distinguished from usura velata, veiled
or concealed usury, which consists in giving a BOND for the loan, in the amount of which is
included the stipulated interest. (Black4)

USUARIUS - Latin. In the civil law. One who had the MERE USE OF A THING
BELONGING TO ANOTHER for the purpose of supplying his daily WANTS; A USUARY.
(Black4)

USURARIUS - In old English law. A usurer. (Black4)

USURIOUS - Pertaining to usury; PARTAKING OF THE NATURE OF USURY; involving

usury; TAINTED WITH USURY; as, A USURIOUS CONTRACT. (Black4)

USURIOUS CONTRACT - A contract if interest contracted to be paid exceeds the rate

ESTABLISHED BY STATUTE. It being sufÞcient when there is contingency whereby lender
may get MORE THAN LAWFUL RATE of interest. (Black4)

USUS - Latin. In Roman law. A precarious ENJOYMENT of land, corresponding with the
right of habitatio of houses, and being closely analogous to the tenancy at sufferance or at will
of English law. THE USURIUS (I. E., TENANT BY USUS) COULD ONLY HOLD ON SO
LONG AS THE OWNER FOUND HIM CONVENIENT, and had to go so soon as ever he
was in the owner's way (molestus.) The usuarius could not have a friend to share the produce.
It was scarcely permitted to him (Justinian says) to have even his wife with him on the land;
and he could not let or sell, the right being strictly PERSONAL to himself. Brown. (Black4)

USUS FRUCTUS - Latin. In Roman law. USUFRUCT; usufructuary right or possession. THE
TEMPORARY RIGHT OF USING A THING, WITHOUT HAVING THE ULTIMATE
PROPERTY, OR FULL DOMINION, OF THE SUBSTANCE. (Black4)

USO - In Spanish law. Usage; that which arises from certain things which men say and do
and PRACTICE uninterruptedly for a great length of time, without any hindrance whatever.
(Black4)

USUAL - Habitual; ordinary; customary; according to usage or custom; COMMONLY

ESTABLISHED, OBSERVED, OR PRACTICED. Such as is in common use or occurs in
ordinary practice or course of events. Synonymous with custom, common, wonted, regular.
(Black4)

USUAL PLACE OF ABODE - Within meaning of statute relating to SERVICE OF PROCESS

is place where defendant is actually living at time of service. (Black4)

!891
 USUAL COURSE - These words in statute excepting from application of Compensation Act
employment not in usual course of employer's trade or business, refer to normal operations
constituting regular business of employer. (Black4)

USUCAPIO or USUCAPTIO - A term of Roman law used to denote a mode of acquisition of

property. It corresponds very nearly to the term "prescription." But the prescription of Roman
law differed from that of the English law, in this: that no mala Þde possessor (i.e., PERSON IN
POSSESSION KNOWINGLY OF THE PROPERTY OF ANOTHER) could, by however long
a period, acquire title by possession merely. The two essential requisites to usucapio were
justa causa (i.e., TITLE) and bona Þdes, (i.e., IGNORANCE.) The term "usucapio" is sometimes,
but erroneously, written “usucaptio.” (Black4)

—=—

Mammon is usury, for usury is the placing of a value on that which is priceless. Usury is simply
value placed upon time. In Reality, it is value placed upon something that is nothing. Our residence
is only a part of mammon, words on paper that represent our Þxedness in mere monetary
consideration and performance. We are only bona Þde users of the mala Þde holders. Another
phraseology for this state of use as a usuary is called Cestui Que Use.

CESTUI, CESTUY - He. Used frequently in composition in law French phrases. (Black4)

CESTUI QUE VIE - HE WHOSE LIFE IS THE MEASURE OF THE DURATION OF AN

ESTATE. The PERSON for whose life any lands, tenements, or hereditaments are held.
(Black4)

CESTUI QUE USE - He for whose use and beneÞt lands or tenements ARE HELD BY
ANOTHER. The cestui que use has the right to receive the proÞts and beneÞts of the estate,
but the legal title and possession (as well as the duty of defending the same) RESIDE IN
THE OTHER. (Black4)

CESTUl QUE TRUST - He who has a RIGHT to a beneÞcial interest in and out OF AN
ESTATE THE LEGAL TITLE TO WHICH IS VESTED IN ANOTHER. The PERSON who
possesses the equitable right to property and receives the rents, issues, and proÞts thereof,
the legal estate of which is VESTED IN A TRUSTEE. BeneÞciary of trust. (Black4)


CESTUl QUE TRUST - He for whose beneÞt ANOTHER PERSON IS SEISED OF LANDS
OR TENEMENTS OR IS POSSESSED OF PERSONAL PROPERTY. He who has a right to a
beneÞcial interest in and out of an estate the legal title to which is VESTED IN ANOTHER.
He may be said to be THE EQUITABLE OWNER, (and) is entitled therefore, to the rents and
proÞts; may transfer his interest, subject to the provisions of the instrument creating the
trust; MAY DEFEND HIS TITLE IN THE NAME OF HIS TRUSTEE; BUT HAS NO LEGAL
TITLE TO THE ESTATE, AS HE IS MERELY A TENANT AT WILL IF HE OCCUPIES THE
ESTATE; AND MAY BE REMOVED FROM POSSESSION IN AN ACTION OF
EJECTMENT by his own trustee. See Trust. (Bouv1892)

—=—

Oft quoted but little understood, the 1666 Cestui Que Act of Great Britain is very much about the
law of persons, and is clear that estate is attached to a person (legal status, a Þction of law). As we
now fully understand that a spiritually dead man is a legal person under the crown or nation, and
that all lands stem from that dead trust, this act explains and attempts to rectify the strange
occurrence of very much Alive men being seen as dead when “beyond sea,” meaning beyond the
kingÕs realm of Þctional jurisdiction. Persons simply cannot exist anywhere outside of a legal
jurisdiction unless an agreement between two kingdoms (principalities) is created so as to cause
such recognition of foreign persons, which fall mostly under the law of nations today. So it is with

!892
each State of the United States, as well as with each nation. And today we may acquire a world
passport from the United Nations so that our person is recognized and protected in all consenting
nations, so that we as persons (voluntary slaves) don’t have so many “inconveniences” in our dead
existence and travels.

No blood… no Life! The life of a Þctional, legal person lasts as long as the manÕs (agentÕs) heart
beats and no longer, since no legitimate blood ßows to his issue (offspring). The puppet (person)
lives only as long as its master controls it through agency. We exist in persona (behind a mask) on a
giant monopoly board, without land, and pay tax every time we trespass on another’s land
(property), which is in fact all of the land out there! Our maze never ends.

Let us read this “strawman” act, the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1666, as it stands today in parliament,
with citations that include:

• “The Cestui que Vie Act 1666” given by Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), Sch. 2

• Preamble omitted in part under authority of Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), Sch. 1

• Certain words of enactment repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1888 (c. 3) and remainder
omitted under authority of Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), s. 3

• Abbreviqations or contractions in the original form of this Act have been expanded into
modern lettering in the text set out above and below.

—=—

Cestui Que Vie Act 1666

1666 CHAPTER 11 18 and 19 Cha 2

An Act for Redresse of Inconveniencies by want of Proofe of the DECEASES OF PERSONS

beyond the Seas or absenting themselves, UPON WHOSE LIVES ESTATES DOE DEPEND.

X1 Recital that Cestui que vies have gone beyond Sea, and that Reversioners cannot Þnd out
WHETHER THEY ARE ALIVE OR DEAD.

Whereas diverse Lords of Mannours and others have granted Estates by Lease for one or
more life or lives, or else for yeares determinable upon one or more life or lives, And it hath
often happened that such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene
granted have gone beyond the Seas or soe absented themselves for many yeares that the
Lessors and Reversioners cannot Þnde out whether such person or persons be alive or dead
by reason whereof such Lessors and Reversioners have beene held out of possession of their
Tenements for many yeares after all the lives upon which such Estates depend are dead in
regard that the Lessors and Reversioners when they have brought Actions for the recovery of
their Tenements have beene putt upon it to prove the death of their Tennants when it is
almost impossible for them to discover the same, For remedy of which mischeife soe
frequently happening to such Lessors or Reversioners.

[I.] Cestui que vie REMAINING BEYOND SEA FOR SEVEN YEARS together and no Proof
of their Lives, Judge in Action to direct a Verdict as though Cestui que vie WERE DEAD.

If such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene or shall be granted
as aforesaid shall remaine beyond the Seas or elsewhere absent themselves in this Realme by
the space of seaven yeares together and noe sufÞcient and evident proofe be made of the
lives of such person or persons respectively in any Action commenced for recovery of such
Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners IN EVERY SUCH CASE THE PERSON OR
PERSONS UPON WHOSE LIFE OR LIVES SUCH ESTATE DEPENDED SHALL BE

!893
 ACCOUNTED AS NATURALLY DEAD, And in every Action brought for the recovery of the
said Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners their Heires or Assignes, the Judges before
whom such Action shall be brought shall direct the Jury to give their Verdict as if the person
soe remaining beyond the Seas or otherwise absenting himselfe were dead.

II. S. II repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), Sch. 1

III. S. III repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1863 (c. 125)

IV. If the supposed dead Man prove to be alive, then the Title is revested. Action for mean
ProÞts with Interest.

[X2. Provided alwayes That if any person or [X3 person or] persons shall be evicted out of any
Lands or Tenements by vertue of this Act, and afterwards if such PERSON OR PERSONS
UPON WHOSE LIFE OR LIVES SUCH ESTATE OR ESTATES DEPEND shall returne
againe from beyond the Seas, or shall on proofe in any Action to be brought for recovery of
the same [X3 to] BE MADE APPEARE TO BE LIVEING; or to have beene liveing at the time
of the Eviction, That then and from thenceforth the Tennant or Lessee who was outed of the
same his or their Executors Administrators or Assignes shall or may reenter repossesse have
hold and enjoy the said Lands or Tenements in his or their former Estate for and dureing
the Life or Lives or soe long terme as the said person or persons upon whose Life or Lives
the said Estate or Estates depend shall be liveing, and alsoe shall upon Action or Actions to
be brought by him or them against the Lessors Reversioners or Tennants in possession or other
persons respectively which since the time of the said Eviction received the ProfÞtts of the
said Lands or Tenements recover for damages the full ProfÞtts of the said Lands or
Tenements respectively with lawfull Interest for and from the time that he or they were
outed of the said Lands or Tenements, and kepte or held out of the same by the said Lessors
Reversioners Tennants or other persons who after the said Eviction received the ProfÞtts of
the said Lands or Tenements or any of them respectively as well in the case when the said
person or persons upon whose Life or Lives such Estate or Estates did depend are or shall be
dead at the time of bringing of the said Action or Actions as if the said person or persons
where then liveing.]

—Cestui Que Vie Act 1666, 1666 c. 11 (Regnal. 18_and_19_Cha_2), from the U.K. Legislature Archives

—=—

Proof of life… This is obviously not speaking of the self-evident Reality of God’s Nature.

Here we can see that a pirate, in order to steal the lands and tenements of all men, simply need
cause those men to become somehow statistically dead in their consideration as Living (spiritually
Alive) men. Personhood, as public citizenship to the United States, causes such an attainder of
blood so as to mimic such a Natural death. In other words, by causing all newly born heirs of the
blood to be registered and certiÞed as foreign, public United States citizenships instead of as
private heirs of the blood of one of the private, landholding People (several States), the pirates can
then enter onto those lands and claim them as their own. No heirs are apparent by law, for the
contract makes the law. No heirs are Living (in blood consideration).

And yet, even in this Cestui Que Vie Act as currently active law, we Þnd that a man need merely
prove he is alive for his trust and lands and tenements to be re-granted and all proÞts and interests
made by these land-grabbing pirates in their trickery, as recompensed to the proven, Living (blood)
heir!

We can now fully understand the purpose of creating this nation, this district (distress, distraint,
seizure), this pirate cove, which is purely to cause the Þctional death of all the commonalty and to
lesson the numbers of landholders by diminishing legitimized heirship — to cause original
(ancestral) sin (syn) via artiÞcial, legal corruption of blood as a heraldic suicide (infanticide by legal

!894
rebirth). And so we are back to the notion of fabled genealogies, for without lawfully considered
blood and Arms no man may hold lands in this conquered (purchased) system. A United States
citizenship is the modern, foreign version of being “beyond sea,” as being beyond the realm of the
actual Lands of the States (People) in their actual confederation and union, and so considered as
being dead in connection to any of the Lands of those territories (terra) of the States.

One example of the presumption of fact that veriÞes the common, public citizenship to be bound
by and under this trust act comes from the New York Second Class Cities Law, §22:

OFFICERS, TRUSTEES OF PUBLIC PROPERTY:

“The common council and the several members thereof, and all ofÞcers and employees of
the city are hereby declared trustees of the property, funds and effects of said city
respectively, so far as such property, funds and effects are or may be committed to their
management or control, AND EVERY TAXPAYER RESIDING IN SAID CITY IS HEREBY
DECLARED TO BE A CESTUI QUE TRUST IN RESPECT TO THE SAID PROPERTY,
FUNDS AND EFFECTS RESPECTIVELY;  and any co-trustee or any cestui que trust shall be
entitled as against said trustees and in regard to said property, funds and effects to all the
rules, remedies and privileges provided by law for any co-trustee or cestui que trust; to
prosecute and maintain an action to prevent waste and injury to any property, funds and estate
held in trust; AND SUCH TRUSTEES ARE HEREBY MADE SUBJECT TO ALL THE
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IMPOSED BY LAW ON TRUSTEES, AND SUCH
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES MAY BE ENFORCED BY THE CITY OR BY ANY CO-
TRUSTEE OR CESTUI QUE TRUST AFORESAID. The remedies herein provided shall be in
addition to those now provided by law.”

—New York Second Class Cities Law, sub-Section 22, New York Code

—=—

Let me emphasize here… Every taxpayer (US public citizenship) resident in New York City is
basically considered as dead! What a dead (bloodless) man holds in persona is always the property
of that which constitutes (decides/designs) what is life. Nothing is dead under Jehovah (Natural
Law), for the cycle of Life goes on despite what ceases to Exist in any moment. Death happens in
time, a mere blip in the continuous Reality of Existence and passing on of blood (Real Life). And
what was of the Life before its Death continues in that Life’s offspring. This is Eternal Life. The
blood never ceases to ßow. Only the Þctions of men may pretend to defeat such a self-existent, self-
evident Reality. And with a bit of word-magic and brainwashing, the Þction is very effective in
causing belief (respect) of the life and authority of dead things.

This is the great mystery now revealed. These pirates may only have power over us as long as we
continue to accept and consent to the conÞrmation and ratiÞcation of our own spiritual death in
personhood. If we were to reclaim our heirship, our blood inheritance, our private lands held by
their estates through trickery and word magic, then their public laws of contract with US persons
no longer would apply. The great secret is that only because our lands were tricked and pirated out
from under our bloodline in Arms, knowing that as private men we have the right to bear those
heraldic Arms of our True fathers as a right negatively protected by the constitution, we are instead
under the positive law will of the state. Only when we reclaim these territorial lands as our own
heritage will we ever be considered as privately Alive (in blood) again. And only then might we
ever have a say in the political corruption that controls the multitude and the international trade
schemes of commerce. Only by lawfully (by blood right) taking back our private lands can we
possibly ever even attempt to Free all other men without war and bloodshed. Only when we come
Alive again may we be indulged to follow christÕs teachings and defeat these word-magicians,
priests, and legal pirates.

!895
 —=—

“He who would have been heir to the father of the deceased shall also
be heir of the son.”
—CESTUI QUE DOIT INHERITER AL PERE DOIT INHERITER AL FILS. Fitzh. Abr. "Descent," 2; 2 B1. Comm. 239, 250. (Black4)

—=—

“He to whom THE PEOPLE IS FATHER, HAS NOT A FATHER.”

—Cui pater est populus non habet ille patrem. Co. Litt. 123. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“An accessary follows the nature of his PRINCIPAL.”

—Accessorius sequit naturam sui principalis. 3 Co. Inst. 349. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“The accessory does not lead, but FOLLOWS ITS PRINCIPAL.”

—Accessorium non ducit sed sequitur suum principale. Co. Ltt 152. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

So who is he whose father is the people? It’s you of course, if the above maxim (principle of law)
Þts. That is, if your parents de-livered you by birth certiÞcation into the possession of the national,
distressed (districted) state (PeopleÕs government). A public person is an accessory to fraud, a user
of anotherÕs property both in name and in title, a felon. We access the right of use through a
licensed agency relation-ship, by acting in the person of government (principal), which is why we
cannot call foul or claim fraud. A fraud acting purposefully and ÒknowinglyÓ in agency cannot
expect his fraudulent principal to rescue him from fraud, now can he? There is no salvation from
fraud while acting as accessory to it. There is no Natural freedom while using the proprietary name
(id-entity) and false corporate trust of another.

Does the legal law help or hinder, protect or antagonize you? Only your actions and intent can
answer that question, and only the principles of law can help to deduce motive.

ACCESSORY - adjective - [Latin Accessorius, from accessus, accedo. See Accede. This word is
accented on the Þrst syllable on account of the derivatives, which require a secondary accent
on the third; but the natural accent of accessory is on the second syllable, and thus it is often
pronounced by good speakers.] 1. Acceding; contributing; AIDING IN PRODUCING SOME
EFFECT, OR ACTING IN SUBORDINATION TO THE PRINCIPAL AGENT. Usually, in a
bad sense, as John was accessory to the FELONY. 2. Aiding in certain acts or effects in a
secondary manner, as accessory sounds in music. - noun - 1. In law, ONE WHO IS GUILTY
OF A FELONY, NOT BY COMMITTING THE OFFENSE IN PERSON OR AS PRINCIPAL,
BUT BY ADVISING OR COMMANDING ANOTHER TO COMMIT THE CRIME, OR BY
CONCEALING THE OFFENDER. There may be accessories in all felonies, but not in treason.
An accessory before the fact, is one who counsels or commands another to commit a felony,
and is not present when the act is executed; after the fact, when one receives and conceals the
offender. 2. THAT WHICH ACCEDES OR BELONGS TO SOMETHING ELSE, AS ITS
PRINCIPAL. (Webs1828)

!896
 ACCESSORIAL - adjective - Pertaining to an accessory; AS ACCESSORIAL AGENCY,
ACCESSORIAL GUILT. (Webs1828)

ACCEDE - verb intransitive - [Latin accedo, of ad and cedo, to yield or give place, or rather to
move.] 1. To agree or assent, as to a proposition, or to terms proposed by another. Hence in a
negotiation. 2. TO BECOME A PARTY, by agreeing to the terms of a treaty or convention.
(Webs1828)

HE - Properly a pronoun of the masculine gender, but commonly construed in statutes to

include BOTH SEXES as well as CORPORATIONS. May be read “THEY.” (Black4)

“HE WHO SEEKS EQUITY MUST DO EQUITY.”

“ - This expression means that the party asking the aid of an equity court MUST STAND
IN A CONSCIENTIOUS RELATION TOWARD HIS ADVERSARY and the transaction
from which his claim arises must be fair and just and the relief must not be harsh and
oppressive upon defendant. And that court will not confer equitable relief on party
seeking its aid, unless he has acknowledged and conceded or will admit and provide
for all equitable rights, claims, and demands justly belonging to adverse party and
growing out of or necessarily involved in subject matter of controversy. It is in
pursuance of this maxim that equity enforces the right of the wife’s equity to a settlement.
(Black4)

—=—

If you consider what this means, we need only to look at the greedy way in which we are litigious
with each other to immediately understand why no True Equity Exists in this legal system. We sue
for damages far greater and in excess to what is deserved as an equitable recompense, a state
certainly not Existing in Natural Equity. And of course the organized crime syndicate of barratry
that we call the Bar Association is to blame for this, as its membership makes up the administrative
law judges and for-proÞt attorney racket that promotes such debauchery and mockery of the justice
system. A $1 million dollar settlement for spilling hot coffee?

As long as we act inequitably (not by the constraints and reasoning of the Natural Law), then we
should never expect to be treated any differently than the feudal state we are a part of and act so
foolishly within. Unless we conscientiously object to this legal system and oppose it with all our
will, never to seek false gain at the expense of all others from it again, we should only ever expect
to stay in its bonded state of debtor’s hell.

The following maxims apply to he who seeks equity:

—=—

“HE WHO COMES INTO A COURT OF EQUITY MUST COME

WITH CLEAN HANDS.” (Black4)
—=—

“HE WHO WILL HAVE EQUITY DONE TO HIM MUST DO

EQUITY TO THE SAME PERSON.” (Black4)
—=—

!897
 —=—

“HE WHO HAS COMMITTED INIQUITY SHALL NOT HAVE

EQUITY.” (Black4)
—=—

“HE WHO IS SILENT WHEN CONSCIENCE REQUIRES HIM TO

SPEAK SHALL BE DEBARRED FROM SPEAKING WHEN
CONSCIENCE REQUIRES HIM TO BE SILENT.” (Black4)
—=—

Yet another Þgurative condition of lawÉ the doctrine of clean hands. But to be considered as clean
in manÕs law can only mean a higher status in corruption, one superior to the plebes in blood
consideration. But remember that there is only purity and cleanliness in GodÕs Nature and nowhere
else. The law of man recognizes this, and is repulsed by that state of Natural Being, never
respecting the negative protections of that Natural Law, except in those that received it for them-
selves.

Again, we cannot act in fraud (in public citizenship) and also claim to have clean hands.

CLEAN HANDS - Equitable relief may be DENIED on ground of DECEIT OR IMPURITY

OF MOTIVE, FRAUD OR WILLFUL MISCONDUCT, unjust and unfair conduct,
UNLAWFUL OR INEQUITABLE CONDUCT, WRONGDOING. The maxim is conÞned to
misconduct in relation to or connected with the matter in litigation. It is inapplicable where
to withhold relief would offend public morals more than to grant relief, and where result will
be TO LEAVE PROPERTY IN HANDS OF ONE HAVING NO CLAIM THERETO or require
further litigation. The act must prejudicially affect defendant. But it has been held that
application of maxim is not limited to a case where the iniquitous action is one of which the
moving party may personally complain. (Black4)

CLEAN - Irreproachable; innocent of fraud or wrongdoing; FREE FROM DEFECT IN

FORM OR SUBSTANCE; FREE FROM EXCEPTIONS OR RESERVATIONS. It is a very
elastic adjective, however, and is particularly dependent upon context. (Black4)

CLEAN - adjective - In a general sense, FREE FROM EXTRANEOUS MATTER, OR

WHATEVER IS INJURIOUS OR OFFENSIVE; hence its signiÞcation DEPENDS ON THE
NATURE AND QUALITIES OF THE SUBSTANCES TO WHICH IT IS APPLIED. 1. Free
from dirt, or other foul matter; as clean water; a clean cup; a clean ßoor. 2. Free from weeds or
stones; as clean land; a clean garden or Þeld. 3. Free from knots or branches; as clean timber. In
America, CLEAR is generally used. 4. FREE FROM MORAL IMPURITY; INNOCENT. Who
can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Job 14:4. Acts 18:6. 5. FREE FROM CEREMONIAL
DEFILEMENT. Leviticus 10:10; Numbers 19:9. 6. Free from guilt; sanctiÞed; holy. John 13:10;
Psalms 51:7. 7. That might be eaten by the Hebrews. Genesis 7:2; Genesis 8:20. 8. That might be
used. Luke 11:39. 9. Free from a foul disease; cured of leprosy. 2 Kings 5:10. Math. 8. 10.
Dextrous; adroit; not bungling; free from awkwardness; as a clean feat; a clean boxer. 11. Free
from infection; as a clean ship. A clean bill of health is a certiÞcate that a ship is clean or free
from infection. - adverb - 1. Quite; PERFECTLY; WHOLLY; entirely; fully; indicating
separation or complete removal of every part. The people passed clean over Jordan. Joshua
3:17. Is his mercy clean gone forever? Psalms 77:8. This use of clean is not now elegant, and not
used EXCEPT IN VULGAR LANGUAGE. 2. Without miscarriage; dextrously. Pope came off
clean with Homer. - verb transitive - TO REMOVE ALL FOREIGN MATTER FROM; to
separate from any thing whatever is extraneous to it, or whatever is foul, noxious, or

!898
offensive, as dirt or Þlth from the hands, body or clothes, foul matter from a vessel, weeds,
shrubs and stones from a meadow; TO PURIFY. Thus, a house is cleaned by sweeping and
washing; a Þeld is cleaned by plowing and hoeing. (Webs1828)

HAND - noun - [Latin hendo, in prehendo.] …5. ACT; deed; PERFORMANCE; EXTERNAL
ACTION; that is, the effect for the cause, the hand being the instrument of action. Thou
sawest the contradiction between my heart and hand. 6. Power of PERFORMANCE; skill… 7.
Power of making or producing. AN INTELLIGENT BEING COMING OUT OF THE
HANDS OF INFINITE PERFECTION. 8. MANNER OF ACTING OR PERFORMANCE; as,
he changed his hand. 9. AGENCY; PART IN PERFORMING OR EXECUTING. Punish every
man who had a hand in the mischief. We see the hand of God in this EVENT. 10.
Conveyance; AGENCY IN TRANSMITTING. 11. Possession; power. The estate is in the
hands of the owner. The papers are in my hands. 12. The cards held at a game; hence, a game.
13. That which performs the ofÞce of the hand or of a Þnger in pointing; as the hand of a
clock; the hour hand and the minute hand. 14. A PERSON; AN AGENT; A MAN
EMPLOYED IN AGENCY OR SERVICE. The mason employs twenty hands. 15. Form of
writing; style of penmanship; as a good hand; a bad hand; a Þne hand. 16. AGENCY;
SERVICE; ministry. Exodus 4:2. Leviticus 8:23. 17. In Scripture, THE HAND OF GOD, IS
HIS ETERNAL PURPOSE AND EXECUTIVE POWER. Acts 4:28. 18. The providential
bounty of God. Psalms 104:28. 19. The power of God exerted in judgments or mercies, in
punishing or defending. Judges 2:15. Psalms 32:4. 20. THE SPIRIT OF GOD; DIVINE
INFLUENCE. 1 Kings 18:9. 21. THE FAVOR OF GOD, or his support. Nehemiah 2:8. Luke
1:1. At hand near; either present and within reach, or not far distant. Your husband is at hand
I hear his trumpet. 1. Near in time; not distant. The day of Christ is at hand. 2 Thessalonians
2:2. By hand with the hands, IN DISTINCTION FROM THE INSTRUMENTALITY OF
TOOLS, engines or animals; as, to weed a garden by hand; to lift, draw or carry by hand. In
hand present payment; in respect to the receiver. Receiving in hand one year's tribute. 1. IN A
STATE OF EXECUTION. I have a great work in hand. At my hand, at his hand etc., denote
from the person or being. Shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive
evil? Job 2:5. Of hand in present possession; as, he has a supply of goods on hand. 1. Under
one's care or management… Under his hand, under her hand, etc., with the proper writing
or signature of the name. This deed is executed under the hand and seal of the owner. Hand
over head, negligently; rashly; without seeing what one does. [Little used.] ÉHand in hand
in union; conjointly; unitedly. To join hand in hand is to unite efforts and act in concert…
To bear a hand to hasten; a seaman's phrase. To be hand and glove, to be intimate and
familiar, as friends or associates. To set the hand to, TO ENGAGE IN; TO UNDERTAKE.
That the Lord thy God may bless thee, in all thou settest thine hand to. Dest. 23. To take in
hand, to attempt; to undertake. Luke 1:1. Also, TO SEIZE and deal with. To have a hand in,
to be concerned in; to have a part or concern in doing; TO HAVE AN AGENCY IN… To
change hands, to change sides; to shift. Hand, in the sense of rate, price, terms, conditions, as
used by Bacon, Taylor, etc., is obsolete; as, 'to buy at a dear hand; ' 'accept the mystery, but at
no hand wrest it by pride or ignorance.' So in the sense of advantage, gain, superiority, as
used by Hayward; and in that of competition, content, as used by Shakespeare. To get hand to
gain inßuence, is obsolete. A heavy hand severity or oppression. A light hand gentleness;
moderation. A strict hand severe discipline; RIGOROUS GOVERNMENT. ÒHands off,Ó a
vulgar phrase for keep off, forbear. Pour water on the hands, in the phraseology of the
Scriptures, is to serve or minister to. 2 Kings 3:10. TO WASH THE HANDS, TO PROFESS
IN INNOCENCE. Matthew 27:29. To kiss the hand imports adoration. Job 31:21. To lean on
the hand imports familiarity. 2 Kings 5:11. To strike hands, TO MAKE A CONTRACT, OR
TO BECOME SURETY FOR ANOTHER'S DEBT OR GOOD BEHAVIOR. Proverbs 17:16.
Putting the hand under the thigh, was an ancient ceremony used in SWEARING. To give the
hand is TO MAKE A COVENANT WITH ONE, OR TO UNITE WITH HIM IN DESIGN. 2
Ki 10. The stretching out of the hand denotes an exertion of power. But, the stretching out of
the hand to God, imports EARNEST PRAYER OR SOLEMN DEDICATION OF ONE'S
SELF TO HIM. Psalms 68, and 143. The lifting of the hand was used in AFFIRMATION
AND SWEARING, AND IN PRAYER imported a solemn wishing of blessings from God.

!899
 Genesis 14:15. Leviticus 1:4. To lift the hand against a superior, to rebel. 2 Samuel 20:9. To put
forth the hand against one, to kill him. 1 Samuel 24:4. To put one's hand to a neighbor's goods,
to steal them. Exodus 22:4. To lay hands on in anger, to assault or SEIZE, or to smite. Exodus
24. Isaiah 11:8. To lay the hand on the mouth, imports SILENCE. Job 40. The laying on of
hands, was also A CEREMONY USED IN CONSECRATING ONE TO OFFICE. Numbers
27:18. 1 Timothy 4:14. It was also used in blessing persons. Mark 10:37. Hiding the hand in the
bosom, denotes idleness; inactivity; sluggishness. Proverbs 19:24. The clapping of hands,
denotes joy and rejoicing. But in some instances, CONTEMPT OR DERISION, OR JOY AT
THE CALAMITIES OF OTHERS. Psalms 47. Ezekiel 25:7. A station at the right hand is
honorable, and denotes favor, approbation or honor. A station on the left hand is less
honorable. Matthew 20:21. 's standing at the right hand of men, imports his regard for them,
and his readiness to defend and assist them. Psalms 16. SATAN'S STANDING AT THE
RIGHT HAND OF MEN, IMPORTS HIS READINESS TO ACCUSE THEM, OR TO
HINDER OR TORMENT THEM. Zechariah 3:1. CLEAN HANDS, DENOTES INNOCENCE
AND A BLAMELESS AND HOLY LIFE. Psalms 24. A slack hand denotes idleness;
carelessness; sloth. Prov 10. The right hand denotes POWER; STRENGTH. Exodus 15. - verb
transitive - To give or transmit with the hand. Hand me a book. 1. To lead, guide and lift with
the hand; to conduct. 2. To manage; as, I hand my oar. 3. TO SEIZE; TO LAY HANDS ON.
[Not used.] 4. In seamanship, to furl; to wrap or roll a sail close to the yard, stay or mast, and
fasten it with gaskets. TO HAND DOWN, TO TRANSMIT IN SUCCESSION, AS FROM
FATHER TO SON, OR FROM PREDECESSOR TO SUCCESSOR. FABLES ARE HANDED
DOWN FROM AGE TO AGE. (Webs1828)

—=—

A man, one who was condemned and doomed (judged) at birth and thus continues operating in
commercial personhood through conÞrmation without blood (with unclean hands), may never
receive equitable relief, for his permitted, felonious actions done in legalized adultery (adult-hood)
are never considered as done in equitableness, never under God’s Law. All actions of citizen-ship
are done in fraud, willful misconduct, deceit, and in felony, as with impurity of motive. Yet those
sinful actions are all protected in security by the licensure (permissive anarchy) of legal law. This is
the state of being a strawman. In debtor’s hell, dummy’s (agents) cannot have clean hands because
they have no hands of their own, their hands being only the tools of their principal.

So what does it mean to have the right to use property by prescription?

We commonly (vulgarly) know the common word prescription to be what a doctor writes as
instructions for the usage of drugs. In other words, the authoritarian governing master and
syndicalist professor of medicine is laying down the laws of how the subservient patient may use
those drugs legally, according to the laws prescribed by government. The doctor is an agent, the
patient a third party. But the patient never acquires the drugs as his own property, only being
granted the ability to use what is not his for a heavy, usurious charge. Hospitals and pharmacies
are merely grocers of pharmacopeia.

Perhaps this is a good point to explore this word pharmacist and doctor as it pertains to magic and
those syndicalist automatons who prescribe it. It is only the perceptions of what pharmacopeia was
and is that have changed, not the actual meaning. And the bonus money is abounding for such
witting and unwitting but legally licensed deceit and fraud.

The word pharmaceutical is an adjective from the 1640s (pharmaceutic in the same sense is from
1540s), stemming from the Late Latin pharmaceuticus "of drugs," and from Greek pharmakeutikos and
pharmakeus "preparer of drugs, POISONER.”

The noun pharmacy then comes from the late 14th century with the meaning of "A MEDICINE,"
from Old French farmacie "a purgative,” from Medieval Latin pharmacy and Greek pharmakeia "use
of drugs, medicines, POTIONS, OR SPELLS; POISONING, WITCHCRAFT; remedy, cure," from

!900
pharmakeus (fem. pharmakis) "preparer of drugs, POISONER, SORCERER" from pharmakon "drug,
POISON, PHILTER (LOVE POTION), CHARM, SPELL, ENCHANTMENT." Its meaning of "use
or administration of drugs" is attested from the14th century, and that of a "place where drugs are
prepared and dispensed" is Þrst recorded from 1833. A pharmacist is a noun, a ßattering title,
stemming from 1811, replacing the obsolete pharmacies from 1720. The Latin word was pharmacopola,
the Greek pharmakopoles.

A pharmacist, like a witch, prepares a recipe, from the 1580Õs, meaning a "medical prescription,"
from Middle French récipé of the 15th century, and from the Latin recipe meaning "take!," the second
person imperative singular of recipere "to take" (i.e., receive). This word (take) is written by
physicians at the head of prescriptions. Figurative use is from the 1640s, while its meaning of
"instructions for preparing food" was Þrst recorded 1743. The original sense survives only in the
pharmacist's abbreviation Rx.

Rx represents whatever formula is concocted by the pharmacist, this word formula stemming from
the 1630Õs meaning "words used in a CEREMONY OR RITUAL" (earlier as a Latin word in
English), from the Latin formula "form, draft, contract, regulation.Ó In law, it takes the meaning of
"a rule, method;" and literally "small form," a diminutive of forma “form." Modern sense is colored
by Carlyle's use (1837) of the word in a sense of "RULE SLAVISHLY FOLLOWED WITHOUT
UNDERSTANDING.Ó From 1706 used as "A PRESCRIPTION, a recipe.Ó Also used
mathematically and in chemistry, and more modernly in motor racing.

Interestingly, the verb (action) of doctoring something stems from the word doctor, taking its
meaning from the1590s, as "to confer a degree on," the word degree as used in education and
licensing having the meaning of a ÒDEGREE OF CRIME,” from the noun form of doctor. But in
verb form it has the meaning of "to treat medically" from 1712, and the sense of "ALTER,
DISGUISE, FALSIFY" is from 1774.

Like a remedy at law, drugs offer no cure or solution, only symptom relief. The disease is doctored
(disguised) by chemical pharmacopeia, but never cured, for pharmacy is only the illusionary
practice of magic as Òmedicine.Ó The doctor slavishly prescribes drugs without actual
understanding of their qualities and effects especially with vaccines, just as so many other legally
titled and licensed persons in the idiocracy of legalism and ßattering title are degreed to do in
exchange for a piece of mammon in usufruct.

The word physician is equally of interest in the magic arts, stemming from the noun leech, an
obsolete title for "physician," from the Old English læce, and probably from Old Danish læke, from
Proto-Germanic lekjaz "ENCHANTER, ONE WHO SPEAKS MAGIC WORDS; HEALER,
PHYSICIAN.Ó As cognates we Þnd Old Frisian letza, Old Saxon laki, Old Norse læknir, Old High
German lahhi, and Gothic lekeis, all carrying the meaning of ÒPHYSICIAN,Ó literally "one who
counsels," perhaps connected with a root found in Celtic (compare Irish liaig "charmer, exorcist,
physician") and Slavic (compare Serbo-Croatian lijekar, Polish lekarz), from lep-agi "conjurer," from
root leg- "to collect," with derivatives meaning "to speak" (see lecture). For sense development, we
can compare Old Church Slavonic baliji "doctor," ORIGINALLY "CONJURER," as related to Serbo-
Croatian bajati "enchant, conjure;" as well as Old Church Slavonic vrači, Russian vrač "DOCTOR,"
related to Serbo-Croatian vrač "sorcerer, fortune-teller." The form is merged with leech in Middle
English, apparently by folk etymology. In 17c., leech usually was applied only to veterinary
practitioners. The fourth Þnger of the hand, in Old English, was l¾cÞnger, translating Latin digitus
medicus, Greek daktylus iatrikos, supposedly because a vein from that Þnger stretches straight to the
heart.

Of course, we know what the purpose of a magician is in all its black art forms, including
especially the legal one. The word misdirection is a noun taken from around 1768, having the
meaning of "action of a conjurer, thief, etc. to distract someone.Ó And the word illusionist is a title
(noun) for a "conjurer, magic act performerÓ from 1840, stemming from the earlier notion of "one
suffering from illusions,Ó from 1812. Middle English had illusor, meaning “deceiver, deluder.”

!901
Finally, the word medicine has an equally interesting history in its origins of magic, as that bestowed
by a conjurer to distract and mislead, most often as a remedy without cure, or as a design to
prolong the disease state to ensure future return use and proÞts.

The noun medicine stems from the 12th century with the meaning of "medical treatment, cure,
remedy," and was also used Þguratively, of spiritual remedies, from the Old French medecine
(Modern French médicine) "medicine, ART of healing, cure, treatment, POTION," from Latin
medicina "the healing ART, medicine; a remedy," and also used Þguratively, perhaps originally ars
medicina "the medical ART," from the feminine of medicinus "of a doctor," from medicus "a
physician" (see medical); though OED Þnds evidence for this is wanting. The English meaning is
format he mid-14th century as "a medicinal potion or plaster.Ó To take (one's) medicine is to
"SUBMIT TO SOMETHING DISAGREEABLE,Ó Þrst recorded in 1865. The North American title
of an Indian medicine-man "shaman" is Þrst attested 1801, from American Indian adoption of the
word medicine in sense of "MAGICAL INFLUENCE." The US-Canadian boundary they called the
“Medicine LineÓ was Þrst attested in 1910, as it conferred a kind of MAGIC PROTECTION:
punishment for crimes committed on one side of it could be avoided by crossing over to the other.
A medicine show as a "traveling show meant to attract a crowd so PATENT medicine can be sold
to them" is from American English, circa 1938.

—=—

“As we cannot use physician for a cultivator of physics, I have called

him a physicist. We need very much a name to describe a cultivator of
science in general. I should incline to call him a Scientist. Thus we
might say, that as an Artist is a Musician, Painter, or Poet, a Scientist is a
Mathematician, Physicist, or NATURALIST.”
—William Whewell, "The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences," London, 1840

—=—

Webster, in his 1828 compilation, deÞnes the word pharmaceutical as such:

PHARMACEUTIC, PHARMACEUTICAL - adjective - [Gr. TO PRACTICE WITCHCRAFT

OR USE MEDICINE; POISON OR MEDICINE.] Pertaining to the knowledge or ART of
pharmacy, or to the ART of preparing medicines. (Webs1828)

PHARMACY - noun - [Gr. a medicament, whether SALUTARY or POISONOUS.] The art or

practice of preparing, preserving and compounding substances, whether vegetable, mineral
or animal, for the purposes of medicine; the occupation of an apothecary. (Webs1828)

DRUG - verb transitive - É 2. Any commodity that lies on hand, or is NOT SALABLE; an
ARTICLE of slow sale, or in no demand in market. 3. A mortal drug or a deadly drug is
POISON. 4. A drudge. 1. To season with drugs or ingredients. 2. To TINCTURE with
something OFFENSIVE. (Webs1828)

—=—

And Þnally, we can consult the ancient language of the bible.

Lexicon: Strong's G5332 - pharmakeus

From pharmakon (a drug, i.e., SPELL-GIVING POTION)

!902
 φαρ7ακεύς - pharmakeús - far-mak-yoos'; from φάρ1ακον phármakon (a drug, i.e. spell-
giving potion); a druggist ("pharmacist") or poisoner, i.e. (by extension) A MAGICIAN:—
SORCERER.

1. one who prepares or uses MAGICAL REMEDIES

2. SORCERER

—=—

Lexicon: Strong's G5331 - pharmakeia

From φαρJακεύς (G5332)

φαρ&ακεία - pharmakeía, far-mak-i'-ah; from G5332; medication ("pharmacy"), i.e. (by

extension) magic (literally or Þguratively):—SORCERY, WITCHCRAFT.

1. the use or the administering of drugs

2. POISONING
3. SORCERY, MAGICAL ARTS, OFTEN FOUND IN CONNECTION WITH
IDOLATRY AND FOSTERED BY IT
4. metaphor - THE DECEPTIONS AND SEDUCTIONS OF IDOLATRY

—=—

To put it simply, man’s body is made up of minerals, including water. A pharmacist, on the other
hand, creates compounds, which simply means two or more minerals bound together, generally
within these corporations in an artiÞcial way so as to ensure patentability. For nothing can be
patented unless it is not of Nature. The sorcerers of the pharmaceutical industry must therefore
magically (through technology) mix together that which does not grow in Nature, which we call as
unique or novel, and therefore patentable drugs. The US Code deÞnes a ÒdrugÓ speciÞcally as two
or more substances mixed together.

Title 21, section 321(g)(1) of US Code let’s us know not only that the word drug is a Þction, but also
what government considers us as patients, that is, as just another animal.

(g) The term ÒdrugÓ means (A) articles recognized in the ofÞcial United States
Pharmacopoeia, ofÞcial Homoeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States, or ofÞcial
National Formulary, or any supplement to any of them; and (B) articles intended for use in the
diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease IN MAN OR OTHER
ANIMALS; and (C) articles (other than food) intended to affect the structure or any function
of THE BODY OF MAN OR OTHER ANIMALS; and (D) articles intended for use as a
component of any article speciÞed in clause (A), (B), or (C)…

—=—

A ÒdrugÓ is an article? A drug is a group of words? So the Þction of law that is a ÒdrugÓ doesnÕt
actually exist in Nature, for anything the legal authority says is a ÒdrugÓ becomes a Þctional ÒdrugÓ
by its descriptive sentencing and ßattering title. Poof! And a plant is magically (named as) a
Òdrug.Ó

ARTICLE - A separate and distinct part of an INSTRUMENT OR WRITING comprising

two or more particulars; ONE OF SEVERAL THINGS PRESENTED AS CONNECTED OR
FORMING A WHOLE. A particular object or substance, a material thing or a class of things.
Material or tangible object. "THING" OF VALUE. (Black4)

ARTICLES - 1. A connected series of propositions; a system of rules. The subdivisions of a

document, CODE, book, etc. A speciÞcation of distinct matters agreed upon or established
by authority or requiring judicial action. 2. A statute; as having its provisions articulately

!903
 expressed under distinct heads. Several of the ancient English statutes were called
“articles” (articuli). 3. A system of rules established BY LEGAL AUTHORITY; as articles of
war, articles of the navy, ARTICLES OF FAITH. (See infra.) 4. A CONTRACTUAL
DOCUMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN PARTIES, CONTAINING STIPULATIONS OR
TERMS OF AGREEMENT; as articles of agreement, articles of partnership. 5. A naval term
meaning EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT… (Black4)

—=—

Do not for one-second think that this use of the word article is strange or that it might be a misprint
or misuse of the word. It’s just word-trickery by artful conjurers. The subjects of these lawmakers
must be in agreement with these terms of art for them to apply to any thing of value (in mammon),
for the word drug only refers to that things valuation as a commercial product (salable article). The
US public citizenship is of course the implied and recognized agreement and constant to this US
code, and thus consent to its assigned punishments and Þnes for breaking that legal law of the
Food and Drug Administration.

You see there, its all in the name.

“Administrative” law, not judicial… It’s not constitutional and certainly not Natural.

In other words, it is what government (the FDA) says it is and that’s that. The FDA code is strictum
jus, strict law, as that which is opposed to equitableness (Natural Law) and unburdened by actual
consideration of any intent. It allows poisons to be called as “medicine.”

While we may certainly Þnd compound substances in Nature, such as chalk (calcium carbonate),
the body of man and of animal and of insect and of plant needs these uncompounded minerals in
their individual natures, just as plants use the trace minerals of the soil to thrive, not compounds.
Put a piece of chalk in a glass of water for a week and you’ll see why “supplements” in compound
form on grocery store shelves are all but worthless. They do not dissolve in water, which composes
around 70% of our body. Almost the entire vitamin and mineral market is a pharmaceutical fraud, a
magic trick. These compounded minerals in combination are of course broken apart by the fulvic
acid content in the soil, leading to these minerals (metals) increased solubility in water and thus
making them able to be absorbed by all the various Life forms of the earth. In other words, Nature
is the only medicine (cure, healer), and like anything else artfully created, the pharmaceutical
industry stands as adversarial (satanic) to the True meaning of medicine, which is only of Source,
not sorcery. Magic and sorcery is not True medicine, and neither are drugs. Drugs cause disease,
having the side effect of sometimes masking symptoms of other disease while causing ever more
problems. For poison is no curative…

—=—

“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee… for thy
MERCHANTS were the great men of the earth; for by thy SORCERIES
(G5331 - PHARMAKEIA) were all nations deceived. And in her was found
the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the
earth.”
—Revelation 18: 23-24, KJB

—=—

Chlorine, ßuoride, anti-depressants, cocaine, MDMA, opium, tobaccoÉ you name it, and chances
are the sorcerers of the “pharmaceutical” industry have patented and legalized it as a helpful and
healthful “drug.” That is… until its deadly effects harm enough “patients” and is recalled as no
longer proÞtable.

!904
In the legal parlance of real estate and title we must use this word prescription as a term of art
within its higher standard of meaning. Though its contemplation is not so different from the
doctor/patient relationship, in this case the relation-ship is between government and every
common (public) citizen-ship in commercial usuary. We either have it or we don’t. This is a similar
but different form of word magic. A prescriptive right of the use of property, like that of
prescription drugs, is in actuality only under the law of usufruct, as a use and enjoyment of
property that does not necessarily belong to the user. Like those prescription drugs, the property
itself (right of disposal) belongs to the States (People), and is beneÞcently granted to the citizen
only for his temporary use. Any other use thereof would be illegal without permissive license,
which is obtained by prescription. The right of use is merely prescribed by legal title with no
conveyance of the actual land or other property. The grant (lie) is only for the use of paper title
(attached to the Þctional person/name of government in franchise), and therefore the foreign user
(man in agency) does not actually hold the property (land or hereditaments) in any tangible way.
His use is only ever through the property (person) of another. His castle is pre-plundered.

Government is like a land-management corporation, where its clients (the apparent sovereign
“People”) rent to its tenants (goyim; as the common, public people in citizenship). It’s a purely
Þctional ownership, a simulation of Reality all on paper, form without substance, words without
Reality. He may enjoy and proÞt from the use and beneÞts of the property, but it ultimately belongs
to another. In other words, the prescriptive user as a public citizen “property owner” only has a
ship, an owner-ship based on his relation-ship to government as a citizen-ship, but the man is not the
actual holder of that property by his blood or in consideration of any Natural blood inheritance by
foundational law. Instead, he is in a state of mere use and enjoyment within the limited prescribed
rights of a feudalistic usufruct granted by that sovereign authority of magistrates through its
constituted government (district).

Only a legal citizenship is dis-eased and corrupted, so only the citizen-ship requires the remedy of
prescription.

PRESCRIPTION - A direction of REMEDY or remedies for a DISEASE and the manner of

using them; a formula for the preparation of a drug and medicine.

In International Law - Acquisition of sovereignty over a territory THROUGH

CONTINUOUS AND UNDISPUTED EXERCISE OF SOVEREIGNTY over it during
such a period as is necessary to create under the inßuence of historical development the
general conviction that the present condition of things is IN CONFORMITY WITH
INTERNATIONAL ORDER.

In Real Property Law - The name given to a mode of acquiring title to incorporeal
hereditaments by immemorial or long-continued ENJOYMENT… In Louisiana,
prescription is deÞned as a manner of acquiring the ownership of property, or
DISCHARGING DEBTS, by the effect of time, and under the conditions regulated by
law. Each of these prescriptions has its special and particular deÞnition. The prescription
by which the ownership of property is acquired, is A RIGHT BY WHICH A MERE
POSSESSOR ACQUIRES THE OWNERSHIP OF A THING which he possesses by the
continuance of his possession during the TIME Þxed by law. The prescription by which
debts are released is a peremptory and perpetual bar to every species of action, real or
personal, when the creditor has been SILENT for a certain time WITHOUT URGING
HIS CLAIM. In this sense of the term it is very nearly equivalent to what is elsewhere
expressed by “limitation of actions,” or rather, the “bar of the statute of limitations”…
“Prescription” and “custom” are frequently confounded in common parlance, arising
perhaps from the fact that immemorial usage was essential to both of them; but strictly,
they materially differ from one another, in that custom is properly a local impersonal
usage, such as borough-English or postremogeniture, which is annexed to a given estate,
while PRESCRIPTION IS SIMPLY PERSONAL, as that a certain man and his ancestors,
or those whose estate he enjoys, have immemorially exercised a right of pasture-

!905
 common in a certain parish, and usage differs from both, for it may be either to persons
or places. Again, prescription has its origin in a grant, evidenced by usage, AND IS
ALLOWED ON ACCOUNT OF ITS LOSS, EITHER ACTUAL OR SUPPOSED, and
therefore only those things can be prescribed for which could be raised by a grant
previously… but this principle does not necessarily hold in the case of a custom.

Corporations by prescription - In English law. Those which have existed beyond the
memory of man, and therefore are looked upon in law to be well created, such as THE
CITY OF LONDON.

Prescription in a que estate - A claim of prescription based on the immemorial

enjoyment of the right claimed, BY THE CLAIMANT AND THOSE FORMER
OWNERS "WHOSE ESTATE" HE HAS SUCCEEDED TO AND HOLDS. (Black4)

PRESCRIBABLE - That to which A RIGHT MAY BE ACQUIRED BY PRESCRIPTION.

(Black4)

PRESCRIBE - To assert a right or title to the ENJOYMENT of a thing, on the ground of

having hitherto had the UNINTERRUPTED AND IMMEMORIAL enjoyment of it. To lay
down authoritatively as a guide, direction, or RULE; TO IMPOSE as a peremptory order; TO
DICTATE; to point; to direct; TO GIVE AS A GUIDE, direction, or rule of action; TO GIVE
LAW. To direct; DEFINE; MARK out. In modern statutes relating to MATTERS OF AN
ADMINISTRATIVE NATURE, such as procedure, REGISTRATION, etc., it is usual to
indicate in general terms the nature of the proceedings to be adopted, and to leave the
details to be prescribed or regulated by rules or orders to be made for that purpose in
pursuance of an authority contained in the act. In a medical sense prescribe means to direct,
designate, or order use of a REMEDY. (Black4)

PROSCRIBED - In the civil law. AMONG THE ROMANS, a man was said to be "proscribed"
WHEN A REWARD WAS OFFERED FOR HIS HEAD; but the term was more usually
applied to those who were SENTENCED TO SOME PUNISHMENT WHICH CARRIED
WITH IT THE CONSEQUENCES OF CIVIL DEATH. (Black4)

—=—

Note here that a prescription in real estate referred to the right of men to claim land by immemorial
use of it through his timeless blood kin. In other words, this was a word relating to blood
inheritance, which killed its civil consideration (artiÞcial life). But what happens when the scribes
and pharisees through their word magic are able to legally corrupt the blood of man? His right of
prescriptive claim suddenly disappears with his blood-right. For his blood is a God-given gift, and
mammon respects not the coursing blood of GodÕs Creation, only the commercial ßow of liquid
currency.

A man that has been thus proscribed as a person in surety (public citizenship) may then enter only
into states of a usufruct condition through that Þctional status under the Cestue Que Vie, for he has
no other type of rights granted him through that Þctional (dead) person. He no longer has a blood
connection under law to his kin, and therefore none to the land his bloodline inhabited
immemorially. The blood is tainted, dis-inheritable, unrecognizable by legal law, and so the rights
can only be passed to dead hands (in mortmain).

MORTMAIN - noun - In law, possession of lands or tenements in DEAD HANDS, or

HANDS THAT CANNOT ALIENATE. Alienation in mortmain is AN ALIENATION OF
LANDS OR TENEMENTS TO ANY CORPORATION, sole or aggregate, ecclesiastical or
temporal, particularly to religious houses, by which the estate BECOMES PERPETUALLY
INHERENT IN THE CORPORATION AND UNALIENABLE. (Webs1828)

—=—

!906
Remember, the City of London and the City of New Columbia (Washington DC) are corporations
holding the mortmain. Persons of those corporations can only hold land with dead hands, for they
are dead in blood and in spirit.

The title of the land as property and all laws binding it is proscribed only to the person (the name),
not the man, by the administrative corporation (municipal government) set up by the landholders
in trust called the state. The man, in order to obtain usurious legal title through surety to a govern-
ment person, must therefore by that of the agency relationship act and acquire tenancy only
permissively in public persona, and therefore must follow those legal laws of usufruct applied to
persons (citizen-ships) so as to enjoy the beneÞt of use assigned to that Þctional entity in rent. But
in the end, the man himself has nothing. For his attached legal (anti-God) surname destroys his
blood as an inheritable consideration at law. A son of the people has no father. A user is never an heir.
A tare is never the wheat. The tainted seed of a dead person (status) can only beget other dead
persons, for the status of the child follows the status of the father.

USUS FRUCTUS - Latin. In Roman law. USUFRUCT; usufructuary right or possession. THE
TEMPORARY RIGHT OF USING A THING, WITHOUT HAVING THE ULTIMATE
PROPERTY, OR FULL DOMINION, OF THE SUBSTANCE. (Black4)

USUFRUCT - In French law. The same as the USUFRUCT of the ENGLISH AND ROMAN
LAW. (Black4)

USUFRUCTUARY - In the civil law. One who has the usufruct or right of ENJOYING
ANYTHING IN WHICH HE HAS NO PROPERTY. (Black4)

USUFRUCT - In the civil law. THE RIGHT OF ENJOYING A THING, THE PROPERTY OF
WHICH IS VESTED IN ANOTHER, and to draw from the same all the PROFIT, UTILITY,
AND ADVANTAGE WHICH IT MAY PRODUCE, PROVIDED IT BE WITHOUT
ALTERING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE THING. Under Greek Law. A RIGHT ATTACHED
TO THE PERSON WHICH MAY NOT BE INHERITED.

Quasi Usufruct - In the civil law. Originally the usufruct GAVE NO RIGHT TO THE
SUBSTANCE of the thing, and consequently none to its consumption; hence only an in-
consumable thing could be the object of it, whether movable or immovable. But in later
times the right of usufruct was, by analogy, EXTENDED TO CONSUMABLE THINGS,
and therewith arose the distinction between true and quasi usufructs. See Imperfect
Usufruct, Supra.

Perfect Usufruct - An usufruct in those things which the usufructuary CAN ENJOY
WITHOUT CHANGING THEIR SUBSTANCE, though their substance may be
diminished or deteriorate NATURALLY BY TIME OR BY THE USE to which they are
applied, as, a house, a piece of land, furniture, and other movable effects.

Imperfect Usufruct - An imperfect or quasi usufruct is that which is of things which

would be useless to the usufructuary IF HE DID NOT CONSUME OR EXPEND THEM
OR CHANGE THE SUBSTANCE OF THEM; as, MONEY, grain, liquors. (Black4)

—=—

This concept of use only (rent in usufruct) is the key to everything wrong or evil within this
worldwide system of nations. It is a system of pure, empty form designed to strip and steal any
substance from man and Nature through the simulation of a modernized system of contract-
feudalism. For if you can take away the very essence of the substantive holding of property rights
and replace it with only the form of mere tenancy (rent) on paper, then eventually, as we see today,
man is left with nothing of his own as his private property. There is nothing left of man but his
representational form of either the publicly agentic goyim (slave) or of the principal gods of that

!907
synagogue of satan (master). If all property of the multitude is public, held only in the dead hands
of a usufruct by public persons while in actuality controlled by only the few private hands, then
not one iota of that property is private to its user and beneÞciary. Without private land and
property, a man simply has no place of his own to act privately, no sanctuary from the legal system,
and thus no place to be a True and pious, morally religious man. Yet someone else does hold its
substance privately, renting it to the public person so seized.

Instead, we live in a state of artiÞcial being that is at its heart nothing but pure usury. For man is
considered only by the commercial value and status of his Þctional person. Man, through surety to
the state’s persona, is considered as just another commodity in trade by his person’s false gods
(creators of art). Surprisingly, this corrupted state of being that we take very much for granted is
actually called as “rent.”

RENT - participle passive - of REND. TORN ASUNDER; split or burst by violence; torn. -
noun - [from rend.] 1. A Þssure; a break or breach made by force; as a rent made in the earth,
in a rock or in a garment. 2. A SCHISM; A SEPARATION; AS A RENT IN THE CHURCH. -
verb transitive - To tear. [See Rend.] - verb intransitive - To rant. [Not in use.] - noun - A SUM OF
MONEY, or a certain amount of OTHER VALUABLE THING, ISSUING YEARLY FROM
LANDS OR TENEMENTS; a compensation or return, in the nature of an acknowledgment,
FOR THE POSSESSION OF A CORPOREAL INHERITANCE. Rents, at common law, are of
three kinds; rent-service, rent-charge, and rent-seek. RENT-SERVICE is when some corporal
SERVICE is incident to it, as by FEALTY and a sum of money; RENT-CHARGE is when the
owner of the rent HAS NO FUTURE INTEREST OR REVERSION EXPECTANT IN THE
LAND, but the rent is reserved in the deed by a clause of DISTRESS for rent in arrear; rent-
seek, dry rent is rent reserved by deed, but without any clause of distress. There are also rents
of assize, certain established rents of free-holders and copy-holders of manors, which cannot
be varied; called also quit-rents. These when payable in SILVER, are called WHITE RENTS,
IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO RENTS RESERVED IN WORK OR THE BASER METALS,
CALLED BLACK RENTS, OR BLACK MAIL. Rack-rent is a rent of the full value of the
tenement, or near it. A fee farm rent is a rent-charge issuing out of an estate in fee, of at least
one fourth of the value of the lands at the time of its reservation. - verb transitive - 1. TO
LEASE; to grant the possession and enjoyment of lands or tenements for a consideration in
the nature of rent. The owner of an estate or house RENTS IT TO A TENANT FOR A TERM
OF YEARS. 2. To take and hold BY LEASE the possession of land or a tenement, for a
consideration in the nature of rent. The tenant rents his estate for a year. - verb intransitive - To
be leased, or let for rent; as, an estate or a tenement rents for Þve hundred dollars a year.
(Webs1828)

BLACK RENTS - Rents reserved in work, grain, or baser money than silver. (Black4)

BLACK MAIL - Rents reserved, payable in work, grain, and the like. Such rents were called
black mail (reditus nigri) in distinction from white rents (blanche Þrmes), which were rents paid
in silver. A YEARLY PAYMENT MADE FOR SECURITY AND PROTECTION TO THOSE
BANDS OF MARAUDERS who infested the borders of England and Scottland about the
middle of the sixteenth century AND LAID THE INHABITANTS UNDER
CONTRIBUTION. In common parlance, the term is equivalent to, and synonymous with,
EXTORTION - THE EXACTION OF MONEY, EITHER FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF A
DUTY, THE PREVENTION OF AN INJURY, OR THE EXERCISE OF AN INFLUENCE. It
supposes the service to be unlawful, and the payment involuntary. Not infrequently it is
EXTORTED BY THREATS, OR BY OPERATING UPON THE FEARS OF THE CREDULITY,
or by promises to conceal, or offers to expose the weakness, the follies, or the crimes of the
victim. (Bouv1892)

RENTERER - noun - A Fine-drawer. (Webs1828)

MAIL - [Latin macula.]… 4. A RENT. Also, a spot. (Webs1828)

!908
SPOT - noun - [We see this word is of the family of spatter, and that the radical sense is to
throw or thrust…] 1. A MARK ON A SUBSTANCE MADE BY FOREIGN MATTER; a speck;
a blot; a place discolored. The least spot is visible on white paper. 2. A STAIN ON
CHARACTER OR REPUTATION; SOMETHING THAT SOILS PURITY; disgrace; reproach;
fault; blemish… - verb transitive - 1. To make a visible mark with some foreign matter; to
discolor; TO STAIN; as, to spot a garment; to spot paper. 2. To patch by way of ornament. 3.
To stain; to blemish; TO TAINT; TO DISGRACE; TO TARNISH; AS REPUTATION.
(Webs1828)

FINE - noun - …[This word is the basis of FINANCE, but I have not found it, in its simple
form, in any modern language, except the English. The word seems to be the Latin Þnis, and
the application of it to pecuniary compensation seems to have proceeded FROM ITS
FEUDAL USE, IN THE TRANSFER OF LANDS, in which a Þnal agreement or concord was
made BETWEEN THE LORD AND HIS VASSAL.] 1. In a feudal sense, a Þnal agreement
between PERSONS concerning lands or rents, or between the lord and his vassal,
PRESCRIBING THE CONDITIONS ON WHICH THE LATTER SHOULD HOLD HIS
LANDS. 2. A SUM OF MONEY PAID TO THE LORD BY HIS TENANT, FOR PER-
MISSION TO ALIENATE OR TRANSFER HIS LANDS TO ANOTHER. This in England
was EXACTED only from the king's tenants in capite. 3. A sum of money paid to the king
OR STATE by way of penalty for an offense; a mulet; a pecuniary punishment. Fines are
usually prescribed by statute, for the several violations of law; or the limit is prescribed,
beyond which the judge cannot impose a Þne for a particular offense. In Þne [Latin in and
Þnis.] In the end or conclusion; to conclude; to SUM UP all… (Webs1828)

FABRICA - In Old English law. The making or coining of MONEY. (Black4)

FABRIC - …something that has been fabricated, constructed, or put together: any complex
construction; a system built up of correlated parts; structure or ediÞce. Something that has
been fabricated, constructed, or put together; the structure of anything or anything
manufactured… (Black4)

FABRICARE - Latin. To make. Used in old English law of a LAWFUL COINING, AND
ALSO OF AN UNLAWFUL MAKING OR COUNTERFEITING OF COIN. Used in an
indictment for forging a bill of lading. (Black4)

FABRICATE - To invent; TO DEVISE FALSELY. Invent is sometimes used in A BAD

SENSE, BUT FABRICATE NEVER IN ANY OTHER. To fabricate a story implies that it is
SO CONTRARY TO PROBABILITY AS TO REQUIRE THE SKILL OF A WORKMAN TO
INDUCE BELIEF IN IT. The word implies FRAUD OR FALSEHOOD; a false or fraudulent
concoction, knowing it to be wrong. To fabricate is to arrange or manufacture circumstances
or indici, AFTER THE FACT COMMITTED, WITH THE PURPOSE OF USING THEM AS
EVIDENCE, AND OF DECEITFULLY MAKING THEM APPEAR AS IF ACCIDENTAL OR
UNDESIGNED; to devise falsely or contrive BY ARTIFICE with the intention to deceive.
Such evidence may be wholly forged and artiÞcial, or it may consist in so warping and
distorting real facts as TO CREATE AN ERRONEOUS IMPRESSION IN THE MINDS OF
THOSE WHO OBSERVE THEM AND THEN PRESENTING SUCH IMPRESSION AS
TRUE AND GENUINE. (Black4)

FABICICATED EVIDENCE - Evidence manufactured or arranged after the fact, and either
wholly false or else warped and discolored by artiÞce and contrivance with a deceitful
intent. See supra. (Black4)

FABRICATED FACT - In the law of evidence. A fact existing only in statement, without any
foundation in truth. An actual or genuine fact TO WHICH A FALSE APPEARANCE HAS
BEEN DESIGNEDLY GIVEN; a physical object PLACED IN A FALSE CONNECTION
WITH ANOTHER, OR WITH A PERSON on whom it is designed to cast suspicion. (Black4)

—=—

!909
The birth certiÞcate is described above perfectly, which is to say that the person (status) thereby
created as a false, legal id-entity of the man already Naturally born, takes the Real, already
happened event and re-creates it into a Þctional certiÞcation. The birth process, as a fabrication of
Life itself that creates an avatar to be placed in an existence subsisting only in that legal matrix code
of pretended jurisdiction, is deÞned above as: to arrange or manufacture circumstances or indici, after
the fact committed, with the purpose of using them as evidence, and of deceitfully making them appear
as if accidental or undesigned; to devise falsely or contrive by artiÞce with the intention to deceive. It is
then considered as a fabricated fact, certiÞed legally, and thus is: A fact existing only in statement,
without any foundation in truth. An actual or genuine fact to which a false appearance has been
designedly given; a physical object placed in a false connection with anotherÉ This is what is
referred to as prima facie evidence of fact, which is to say that which on the face of it, as the Þrst
and unquestioned appearance of that legally spoken or written Òfact,Ó is taken as evidence of
legalized (non-self-evident) truth even when it is a known lie. All persons are lies, as form
(appearance) with no substance (mind, body, and soul). We sometimes call this as the taking of
some thing at face value. And yet the scriptures and principals of law warn time and time again that
we should never put a value upon man. And of course this is why the devilry created the Þctional,
false legal persona, so that man might voluntarily assign such a valuation to himself and stand as
jury over others in similar valuation under mammon.

FACE - That which is shown BY THE MERE LANGUAGE EMPLOYED without any
explanation, modiÞcation, or addition FROM EXTRINSIC FACTS OR EVIDENCE, the
principal sum which it expresses to be due or payable, without any additions in the way of
interest and costs. THE OUTWARD APPEARANCE OR ASPECT OF A THING… The
SURFACE of anything; especially the front, upper, or outer part or surface; that which
particularly offers itself to the view of a spectator. THE WORDS OF A WRITTEN PAPER
IN THEIR APPARENT OR OBVIOUS MEANING, as, the face of a note, bill, bond, check,
draft, judgment record, or contract; the face of a judgment for which it was rendered exclusive
of interest. The surface of anything; especially the front, upper, or outer part or surface; that
which particularly offers itself to the view of a spectator. (Black4)

FACE OF BOOK - Under an act providing that a public or private statute or the proceedings
of any legislative body purporting on the face of the book to be printed by authority of the
government of the state are evidence without further proof, the "face of the book" and the
"title page" NEED NOT COINCIDE, as "face" is used in contradistinction to Òcover.Ó (Black4)

FACE OF INSTRUMENT - That which is SHOWN BY THE LANGUAGE EMPLOYED,

without any explanation, modiÞcation, or addition from extrinsic facts or evidence. Thus, if
the express terms of the paper disclose a fatal legal defect, it is said to be "void on its face."
Regarded as an EVIDENCE OF DEBT, the face of an instrument is the principal sum which it
expresses to be due or payable, without any additions in the way of interest or costs. (Black4)

FACE OF JUDGMENT - The sum for which it was rendered, exclusive of interest. See, also,
Face of instrument. (Black4)

FACE VALUE - This term, in a statute taxing transfers of corporate stock, means par value. As
used in statute concerning acceptance of bonds as bail means that value, written or printed on
face of instrument and the unmatured coupons attached thereto, without reference to the
actual or market value of bonds. The "face value" of an interest bearing note, is the principal
plus accrued interest. The value which can be ascertained from the language of the
instrument without aid from extrinsic facts or evidence. (Black4)

FACERE - Latin. To do; to make. Thus, facers defaltam, to make default; facere duellum, to make
the duel, or make or do battle; facere Þnern, to make or pay a Þne; facere legem, to make one's
law; facere sacramenturn, to make oath. (Black4)

FACILE - In Scotch law. Easily persuaded; easily imposed upon. (Black4)

!910
 PRIMA FACIE - Latin. AT FIRST SIGHT; on the FIRST APPEARANCE; ON THE FACE OF
IT; so far as can be judged from the FIRST DISCLOSURE; PRESUMABLY; A FACT
PRESUMED TO BE TRUE UNLESS DISPROVED BY SOME EVIDENCE TO THE
CONTRARY. (Black4)

FACIES - Latin. The face or countenance; the exterior appearance or view; hence,
contemplation or study of a thing on its external or apparent side. Thus, prima facie means at
the Þrst inspection, on a preliminary or exterior scrutiny. When we speak of a “prima facie
case,” we mean one which on its own showing, on a Þrst examination, or without
investigating any alleged defenses, is apparently good and maintainable. (Black4)

—=—

Most of us admit defeat by merely appearing in persona (legal mask) or with attorney in answer of
our strawman demon being summoned. At this point, the case is merely an administration of the
post-effects of the case. The judge tells us what we owe the court and we are on our way, for on the
face of the case no evidence contrary to the lie that we are that person is spoken. In this way, con-
sent is as well prima facie simply because we are silent subjects acting in a false performance debt
created in infancy and conÞrmed by our use of the legal id-entity in voluntary adultery.

Ever heard or used the expression I can’t place the name with the face? Ever really thought about what
that means? Is the surface or face of the sea truly a full representation of the water, or is it merely
the outward appearance with no depth of substance? Is the appearance of government merely what
is presented by its own propaganda, entertainment, and public education, or is that all just prima
facie evidence of government and law? When a “person” magically appears in court, is anything
actually there? What happens when you ask questions about what lies beneath the “facts?” You get
a work like this oneÉ and you Þnd that it is all hinged on one lie built upon the next lie until, even
more so than any religion can artfully manifest, the faith, beLIEf, and love by the believers
(citizens) of the prima facie truth of government’s legal matrix enters and take over the mind
without mercy and without any actual, tangible, or sensual evidence of its existence. It is like the
fabled ouroboros, the serpent speaking itself into existence while appearing to be eating its own
tail. Its residents are locked inside of the invisible face of its legal appearance, and so caught in the
bowels of its perpetual self-reincarnation, fuel for its self-incarnation, batteries for its consumption,
worker bees for its pre-tended sovereign class of kings and queens.

—=—

“IDENTITY OF NAME IS PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF


IDENTITY OF PERSON.”
—Stebbins v. Duncan, 103 U. S. 47 (1832), cases; State V. Kelsoe, 76 Mo. 507 (1882); 25 Pa. 133; 68 id. 200; 53 Mi. 427. (WCA1889)

—=—

Who would ever consider that their very name and identity is merely a rebuttable presumption of
law with no actual evidence but our own idiotic acceptance of the supposed face of the facts of our
nativity (captivity) in personhood?

Amazingly, we must realize that all of the commercial laws of the United States are but prima facie
in their legalistic nature, totally voluntary, and absolutely rebuttable for the enlightened, regenerate
man. This is simulated law, illusionary, magically represented as if it were legitimate.

U.S. CODE, TITLE 46, APPENDIX APP. > CHAPTER 23 > § 837:



PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE:

!911
 “In any action or proceeding under the provisions of this chapter to enforce a forfeiture
the conviction in a court of criminal jurisdiction of any person for a violation thereof with
respect to the subject of the forfeiture shall constitute PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE of such
violation against the PERSON so convicted.”

—=—

So what does prima facie mean? It means that the presumption stands unless you act and speak out
against it. It means that words will be permitted by the state to deÞne what you are despite your
actual Nature as long as you donÕt rebut the opinion of that agent of artiÞcial law. It means you
cannot remain silent or your silence will be considered as consent on the face of the “facts” at hand
(at bar). These false facts as conÞrmed lies will be rendered as prima facie and therefore stand legally
(without substance) as non-rebutted, full evidence of your acquiescence and agreement to what-
ever status is presumed.

—=—

“What is prima facie evidence of a fact?” 

“It is such as, in judgment of law, is sufÞcient TO ESTABLISH THE

FACT; AND, IF NOT REBUTTED, REMAINS SUFFICIENT FOR THE
PURPOSE.”
—United States v. Wiggins, 39 U.S. 334, 347 (1840), Cornell Law Library online

—=—

Presumption of law is the name of the game. Consent is garnered tacitly through inaction and
silence, which is Þguratively considered as an expression of will. The devil can only accuse, never
evidence. Fiction cannot be proven except in the Þction, and debt only exists in that legal debtor’s
hell. The devil relies only on the ignorance of man to the contractual relationship, to the language
of the laws that bind the man because of it, and thus man’s clueless and unwitting under-standing
to that satanic Þction of law due to non-rebuttal of its legitimacy. Silence and inaction are the main
ingredients of the legal realm, breathing life into that which has none. But most important to these
devilmaster’s scenes is the voluntary ignorance of these legal terms of art and laws they form.
Ignorance, above all else, is key to enslaving the mind. Public-mindedness is an impressed
ignorance like no other, institutionalized in every form of education, entertainment, and church
and state propaganda. We are trained to always take what we see at face value, including the
validity and legitimacy of the legal law.

Title 1 of U.S. Code §204 states:

§204. Codes and Supplements as evidence of the laws of United States and District of
Columbia; citation of Codes and Supplements. In all courts, tribunals, and public ofÞces of the
United States, at home or abroad, of the District of Columbia, and of each State, Territory, or
insular possession of the United States—

(a) United States Code - The matter set forth in the edition of the Code of Laws of the
United States current at any time shall, together with the then current supplement, if any,
establish PRIMA FACIE the laws of the United States, general and permanent in their
nature, in force on the day preceding the commencement of the session following the last
session the legislation of which is included: Provided, however, That whenever titles of
such Code shall have been ENACTED INTO POSITIVE LAW the text thereof shall be

!912
 LEGAL EVIDENCE OF THE LAWS therein contained, in all the courts of the United
States, the several States, and the Territories and insular possessions of the United States.

(b) District of Columbia Code - The matter set forth in the edition of the Code of the
District of Columbia current at any time shall, together with the then current supplement,
if any, establish PRIMA FACIE the laws, general and permanent in their nature, relating
to or in force in the District of Columbia on the day preceding the commencement of the
session following the last session the legislation of which is included, except such laws as
are of application in the District of Columbia by reason of being laws of the United States
general and permanent in their nature.

(c) District of Columbia Code; citation - The Code of the District of Columbia may be cited
as "D.C. Code.”

(d) Supplements to Codes; citation - Supplements to the Code of Laws of the United States
and to the Code of the District of Columbia may be cited, respectively, as "U.S.C., Sup.",
and "D.C. Code, Sup." the blank in each case being Þlled with ROMAN FIGURES
denoting the number of the supplement.

(e) New edition of Codes; citation. - New editions of each of such codes may be cited,
respectively, as "U.S.C., ed." and "D.C. Code, ed.Ó, the blank in each case being Þlled with
Þgures denoting the last year the legislation of which is included in whole or in part. (July
30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 638 .)

—=—

One is left to wonder then which of the laws of these United States are mere prima facie
presumptions of law that are cured by denial of consent, and which ones are actually legal evidence
of law that cannot be denied by rebuttal. As it turns out, this is based on commercial
considerations. Unconstitutional laws are generally commercial and international in nature, as in
the admiralty/administrative jurisdiction, and so not a primary or constitutionally created function
of government. In other words, the prima facie law is essentially the Òfor-proÞt,Ó de facto
(illegitimate) side of government, from the slave-trade to interstate commerce of imports and
exports. So while the creation of the judicial was a constitutional act and thus stands evidentially as
positive law, the creation of the administrative (non-judicial) commercial agencies in the Executive
Department of Justice are only ever prima facie, strictly for “customers” in public (commercial)
persona. We must consent to their opinions for those opinions to effect us and become our law, for
we accept them on their face as if they were True, factual, and legitimate, and our signatures and
other actions in persona seals the deal through conÞrmation of that which is avoidable. A fools
paradise…

When in consideration of what is a “constitutional law,” we must realize that the constitution
mostly set up the structure of the government, not the law itself. In other words, the constitution
was not an administrative document of law, it was a foundational establishment of the government
itself. A local, municipal statute or code on golf courses in municipal corporations (cities/counties)
for instance, has nothing to do with the constitution. And unfortunately, a public law dealing with
United States subjects (citizenships) has nothing to do with the foundation of government, and so
has nothing to do with the constitution, for public persons are not a party to that negative law be-
cause they stand with no reserved rights. When all rights are granted by government, unto persons
(property) that have no rights existing outside of government, then no constitutional considerations
can be taken to protect any reserved, negative, unalienable, God-given rights. For no person is ever
a Creation of God, and so no persons Exist in Nature or under its Law.

To be clear, the constitution did the following:

It established the foundation of:

!913
 Article I – The Legislative Branch.

Article II – The Executive Branch.

Article III – The Judicial Branch.

Article IV – The States (personiÞcation of relationship between fed and several private and
public States)

Article V – Amendments (ability of future generations in posterity of blood to amend the

constitution)

Article VI - Debts, Supremacy, and Oaths, establishing that all laws made from it are the
‘supreme Law of the Land,Õ and that all ofÞcials and agents must swear an oath to that
Constitution (a piece of paper).

Article VII Ð RatiÞcation. JustiÞcation by signature of the attorney/agents who created it.

—=—

What in GodÕs name makes anyone think that the federal, government-created strawman they
legally (artiÞcially) stand in the bond of surety for in agency is a party to anything in the
constitution that established this principality? This is nothing more and nothing less than the
ordaining and establishment of a nation, as the creation of a magistracy (sovereignty), and a
protection of they who created it in posterity. The status of public persons is not mentioned or
protected in any way, shape, or form. Seriously, the damn thing protects slavery, not freedom for
all!

So letÕs look and see just what laws in the US Code of the United States are actually legitimate ones
by their legally issued titles.

ÒPositive law titles of the United States Code, indicated by an asterisk, are LEGAL EVIDENCE
of the law and need no further authoritative citation as prior acts concerning those titles have
been repealed. Other titles to the U.S. Code are "PRIMA FACIE" evidence of the law (1 USC
§204), and ARE PRESUMED TO BE THE LAW, BUT ARE REBUTTABLE by production of
prior unrepealed acts of Congress at variance with the Code…”

ÒTitles 1-50 The Code of the Laws of the United States of America - ENACTED INTO PRIMA
FACIE LAW by act of June 30, 1926, ch. 712, 44 Stat. 1, pt. 1. Covers all general and permanent
laws in force as of December 7, 1925. No revision notes…”

—=—

The following titles of US Code ARE PRIMA FACIE, and are thus rebuttable for the enlightened,
private man:

Title 2 - THE CONGRESS

Title 6 - Homeland Security
Title 7 - Agriculture
Title 8 - Aliens and Nationality
Title 12 - Banks and Banking
Title 15 - Commerce and Trade
Title 16 - Conservation
Title 19 - Custom Duties
Title 20 - Education
Title 21 - Food and Drugs

!914
 Title 22 - Foreign Relations and Intercourse (commerce)
Title 24 - Hospitals and Asylums
Title 26 - Internal Revenue Code, and Appendix
Title 27 - Intoxicating Liquors
Title 29 - Labor
Title 30 - Mineral Lands and Mining
Title 33 - Navigation and Navigable Waters
Title 42 - Public Welfare

Title 43 - Public Lands
Title 45 - Railroads
Title 47 - Telegraphs, Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs
Title 48 - Territories and Insular Possessions
Title 50 - War and National Defense; and Appendix

—United States Code: List of Positive Law Titles With Enacting Cites and Location to Revision Notes: Compiled by Richard J. McKinney, Assistant Law
Librarian, Federal Reserve Board Prepared for a November 9, 2004, program of the Legislative Research Special Interest Section of the Law Librarians'
Society of Washington, D.C., Inc. (http://www.llsdc.org); Last revised in March 2015.


—=—

Note here that every single prima facie, rebuttable title of the US Code above is commercial in its
purpose as opposed to being legitimately foundational (constitutional). Even the “Congress” (of
Title 2) was re-created by that de jure “Congress assembled” into a commercially driven, de facto
clone as an incorporated legal entity (body politic) in the districted “United States” to control
international trade and interstate commerce under international Admiralty/Maritime law, and
speciÞcally not under the purview of constitutionally derived law. ItÕs like an evil twin, a non-
governmental aspect of the governmental process. In other words, these titles deal with
ÒcustomersÓ and not Òtax-payersÓ or Òcitizens,Ó and this is how these governmentÕs Þnancial
reports list their assets and liabilities within their Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports
(CAFRÕs), as ÒgovernmentalÓ and Ònon-governmentalÓ funds. In this anterior personality (legal,
corporate mask), the ÒCongressÓ is not bound under any constitutional considerations, for these are
all illegitimate functions of the Executive Branch, most of them set up by the Title 2 corporation
called “Congress” as separate agencies and corporations.

From an anonymous, pamphlet-style expose called ÔThe Nation That Never Was,Õ we read the
following simple chart of the congressional history of this split personality:

(1) The Congress of the Confederation, or Continental Congress, met from March 1, 1781, to
March 4, 1789, the last such meeting being at 26 Wall Street, New York, New York.


(2) The Þrst alleged congress of the new government met for the Þrst time in New York, at 26
Wall Street therein, on March 4, 1789.


(3) Summarizing the two events, it has been perceived and proposed in U.S. history that: “The
Congress of the Confederation met from March 1, 1781, to March 4, 1789, WHEN IT WAS
REPLACED BY THE CONGRESS ESTABLISHED BY THE UNITED STATES
CONSTITUTION.”


(4) By the alleged “replacement” process, it was claimed, in essence, that the Continental
Congress HAD PASSED ITS “TORCH” OR “WAND” OF AUTHORITY ON TO THE NEW
ALLEGED CONGRESS FOR THE PROPOSED UNITED STATES, IN ORDER THAT THE
SAME MIGHT BE ENABLED TO DO BUSINESS IN ITS STEAD, accordingly. 



—Papers of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789 (Washington: National Archives and Record Service, General Services Administration, 1971), Reel 28,
Item 19, Vol. 6:533, as extracted from ‘The Nation That Never Was’

—=—

!915
Let us be very clear here the difference between a corporation and a government, or rather a
government and a corporation pretending to be its own government as the de facto, militarily ruled
United States district.

There is only one fact that needs to be said here, and we must fully understand this fact in order to
understand our own disposition in legal existence under this district corporation. Quite simply, the
difference between a legitimate (de sure) government structure and every corporation is that a
government is a lawmaker, while a corporation is bound under that government’s law. In other
words, the “United States” as a corporation created by congress in the “corporation of Washington
DC” to be “the seat of government” of (under) the united States of America. To break this down
even more succinctly, a de jure (legitimate) government governs over land (a thing) while
corporations govern over Þction (names and titles of things). The United States, a corporation, is
not land. It is a corporation granted trust over certain public and privately held lands. In other
words, the United States corporation is not a territory (land), but a corporate entity assigned the
trust and care over the territories of the States (incorporated territories). The People of each State
(landholders) are the congress of the united States of America in contractual union, but they created
the corporation called the United States to manage their public lands and protect themselves and
their private lands from the common people (national, US citizen-ships). And as the civil war
proved, they created a monster that would attack its own body (union of several States) to ensure
its own military rule and trust. This, again, is the illusion of competition — the United States being
an incorporated, totally controlled opposition of the landholders (People) of each State, who are the
congress and president (lawmakers) of that corporate entity.

Thus all of these de facto, positive congressional laws in the US Code (being not constitutional but
instead commercial in their nature) in title themselves are prima facie and rebuttable as applied by
commercial ventures and agencies of the United States! Persons may not be able to rebut them, for
persons are property and bound to them. But men of God reborn under Nature’s Law alone are
supra (above) them in every way. These US district laws only apply to commercial things, to the
commercial considerations of Caesar, including public persons but not necessarily private ones (the
People). This is very important to comprehend, for government was not in its organic purpose
created for commercial ventures, though the ability to control “commerce” under admiralty law
was certainly and quite purposefully established and constituted to be “under congress” by the
statement: “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with
the Indian Tribes.” This statement left open the temptation to create a commercial structure far
surpassing the stated purpose and intent of the constituters. But make no mistake, they knew
exactly what they we're doing. For power is only taken and kept when done so in incremental
steps.

To be blunt, the constitution did not create the pirate cove that is the modern United States, but it
certainly allowed for it to be later constructed through virtually unlimited statute by its constituted
authorities under prima facie and unconstitutional considerations. And so the apparently legitimate
(de jure) congress recreated itself into a commercial persona, an artiÞcial person incorporated for the
strict purpose of the expanding the hell out of this purposefully vague and mostly undeÞned
commerce clause. This is not so different a phenomenon than the Highest, moral maxims of law,
which as foundational and scriptural principals protect the private man as he who does not sell his
soul and fall into Þction. And yet ever-increasingly and in meticulous incrementalism and design,
the added maxims of man’s law dealing in contracted dis-ease allow for the most heinous of
corruption towards those foundational principals of the Natural Law. The constitution is
foundational only to the structure of government, not to the laws of the nation with regard to its
voluntary subjects and its primary commercial product, the dollar.

When asked to explain his public comment that “THE CONSTITUTION THAT I INTERPRET
AND APPLY IS NOT LIVING BUT DEAD,” former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia had
this to say:

!916
 —=—

“Much of the, um, HARM that has been done in recent years by activist
constitutional interpretation has been made possible by a theory, which
says, that UNLIKE AN ORDINARY LAW, WHICH DOESN’T
CHANGE… THE CONSTITUTION CHANGES from decade to decade
to comport with, and this is a phrase that we use in our 8th amendment
jurisprudence, we, the court does, to comport with “THE EVOLVING
STANDARDS OF DECENCY THAT MARK THE PROGRESS OF A
MATURING SOCIETY.” In other words, WE HAVE A MORPHING
CONSTITUTION. And, of course, IT’S UP TO THE COURT TO
DECIDE WHEN IT MORPHS AND HOW IT MORPHS. That’s
generally paraded as the “living constitution.” And unfortunately, that
philosophy has made enormous headway, not only with lawyers and
judges, but even with John Q. Public.”
—Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, excerpted from a FORA.TV interview

—=—

Let us be clear here that even this judge of the Supreme Court is basically calling the activists and
constitutionalists out there as idiots! Here is a god telling his subjects that it is he and his fellow
attorney-class alone that “morphs” the constitution according to “evolving standards of decency,”
even when that evolution is in fact an utter devolution in knowledge and moral awareness as we
see happening today.

This commercial functionality, law, and Executive infrastructure had to be created later as de facto
legal entities, as agencies of the prima facie (illegitimate, commercially acting) congress. It was not
created by what is allowed or established by the constitution, nor by men acting under
constitutional restrictions, but only reconstituted to be under the control of that two-faced,
commercialized “Congress” re-created under Title 2. The constitution certainly established the
legitimate congress in its ofÞcial capacity under the private States united in compact and to protect
that privacy between States (Peoples), but the congress then commercially recreated itself under its
own rules and code, establishing its own jurisdictional realm of Þction in which to trap and rule
over the multitude. It created its own legal hell. This distinction must be understood, just as the
congress recreated the evil twin of the “Judicial” branch through the Judicial Act of 1789, which
created an Executive agency in similitude but not sameness, as an administrative, not judicial
agency to oversee the purely illegitimate (unconstitutional) commercial aspects of that district. In
this way Washington DC and its jurisdiction is very much like The Matrix, a false reßection of the
actuality of government, with intent completely opposing the reason for its sources existence; built
to suck the prosperity and liberty of the common people dry like a vampire. It’s piracy, legalized.
Thus a private citizen will not participate in commerce of any sort recognizable as foreign or
interstate, for that would be a public transaction not protected by the constitution. Congress
literally wears two hats. One has a picture of the constitution, while one has a picture of the skull
and crossbones of piracy on the commercial high seas. The intent of congress deÞnes the law it
creates as either positive or prima facie. As all commerce is designed in fraud and deceit and
speciÞcally for proÞt and revenue, they must create this secondary commercial, de facto structure
and law in the form that it requires voluntary participation and consent of customers, which merely
means that, if not rebutted, the presumption stands as a silent consent to any fact of law. And this is
why it is said that the United States has two different governments, the original, constitutional one
and the simulated, unconstitutional, re-created commercial one.

!917
The IRS, for example, has no standing in law without your consent, afÞrmation, and conÞrmation
of commercial taxpayer status in personhood, for its very existence as an agency in US Code is prima
facie. But that doesn’t mean you can’t voluntarily contract yourself as their debt-slave, in the legal
title of “taxpayer.” Title 42, including Social Security, minimum wage and other employee
regulations, Health Care, and so many other public beneÞts that strangle and speciÞcally identify
the population through this individual status of personhood by such evil, blood-tainting marks and
numbers, has no weight unless you agree to participate in its agencies and their commercial
(unconstitutional) programs, thus giving them contractual power over your strawman persona in
proprietary publicity. It collects on public debts by public persons using public funds. And that
collection agency of the treasury (exchequer) places the surety (man contractually bound to per-
form in public persona) into a federal debtor’s prison when the debt is not paid. Stolen time and
forced labor equals proÞt and gain. This has nothing to do with the constitution, of course. And we
must realize that as public citizenships, as debtor’s in the contracted hell of legal personhood, we
are not acting legitimately and so cannot invoke the negative aspects and securities of the
constitution, for we reserve no rights while in surety to another’s property. Remember that with
government protection comes contractual subjection to government. Hospitals and the mental
health industry, including the massive liberties granted to the pharmaceutical industries — these
are all prima facie.

Basically, all commercial entities created by the commercial side of the commercially acting
congress are prima facie and de facto (illegitimate) in their legal nature. The banks, education, agri-
culture, public lands — all of these commercial applications are consent-based. Signature-based.
Even the War Department (now offensively renamed as “Defense”), which conquers through
violent force and the purchase of other countries and states, is purely a commercial agency and
prima facie in all its actions. It would only be lawful if a war was ofÞcially declared by the congress
acting in its intended constitutional functionality, which has not happened since the declaration of
war in 1942. All military actions after World War II have been unlawful, prima facie, and purely
commercial in nature under illegitimate Executive authority called emergency war powers. These will
be discussed thoroughly in Volume II of this work.

All of these are merely the operating presumptions of law, the presumption being that these are the
standing legal considerations by all courts, in that you agree to, consent to, and tacitly under-stand
all of these US Codes and their agencies and agents to be the authority of law. This is not
comprehension, only under-standing, for the principals of law protect one’s right to stand in
voluntary ignorance. To act in person is to stand under the law of persons in commercial Þction.
Unless you just say no and quit claiming to be a public person, unless you execute the strawman’s
life purpose, the government automatically says yes. Your actions and inactions equally express
your will and understanding.

Inversely, notice that the other codes that are considered as enacted, revised, and stand as
“positive” law, have very little if anything at all to do with the commercial side of government in
its business and acquisitions of men, industries, and corporations, being mostly just public services
or protections, or the foundational aspects thereof. They are also the sources of many government
functionalities, such as the banking code, as creator and regulator of the money itself, which is
purely the rules and regulatory functionality of money and money-changers to be used in
commerce, not the actual illegitimate commercial thing or entity itself. Not, for instance, the actual
standing central bank, but the standards of weights and measures thereof.

Environment, Wildlife, The President, National Park Service, Voting and Elections, Public Buildings
and Works, the Postal Service, Patriotic and National Observances, Ceremonies, Organizations, the
Military, National Guard, Pay and Allowances of the Uniformed Services, Patents, and Money and
Finance are all created as positive law codes. They are actually legitimate, constitutionally driven
governmental functions within law, or at least as legitimate as a conspiracy designed to enslave can
be. They are, in other words, legitimate to the private People of the several States, who participate
only privately and with reserve in all things public and commercial.

!918
As for what is the constitutional and positive law, we may consider the following maxim. As public
persons, that which is positively established is a requirement of law that hears no exceptions.

—=—

“Acts required by law to be done, admit of no qualiÞcation.”

—Actus legitimi non recipiunt modum. Hob. 153. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

Again, these positive laws are actual legal evidence, not prima facie (pre-tended) evidence, and so
they are not rebuttable. They are the standard existence as the legal code, and no assumption is
needed for them to apply. They are foundational, not speculative. No reason (qualifying purpose)
for any law is required for its enforcement once it is established. No moral considerations apply to
its blind execution. Only a private man may put to question the authority of that positive law of
persons (status), for he carries not any such artiÞce or public (proprietary) corporate US id-entity.
These United States laws simply do not affect a private citizen of each foreign State with reserved
rights, for it is only public law in the United StatesÕ public jurisdiction. For all others in public
intercourse though, the law is strictly taken without error. This is legalistic equality vs. equitable-
ness under the Natural Law.

When reading the following maxims of law regarding what equity is and how it is applied, do not
forget the dualistic nature of this word. To act in Natural equitableness (verb) according to the
Natural Law of God as one's negative duty to oneÕs fellow man is not the same as a legal system of
legally established (named) equity (noun). For a United States public person, nothing in Nature
may touch such a Þction of law. When the law decides what equity is, equity is no longer a term of
Natural Law. Equity in Þction is the road runner vs. Wile E. Coyote. Both of these are cartoon
characters, and their law is the law of their artistic creator. Their actions are not their own, and their
law is what is forced upon them. This is legal equity via contractual relationship to the state, the
equity of artiÞcial (legally natural) persons. And so in each case below, remember your perspective.
Remember what is equity under the God of Truth and what it is under the legal gods of the big lie.
Legal equality is only equal punishment (sanction) under the law. But most important to
comprehend here is that by becoming (acting as) a strawman, by taking upon oneself in persona
(property) the positive (anti-God) rights and marks of a Þctional entity, the man has removed
himself from the negative realm of God-given rights in Truth Equity and Equality, and claims
instead to be above GodÕs Nature and Its Law. Citizenship in any form is by necessity an inequity
and inequality to all men not also citizens. One who abandons his place in GodÕs Nature has no
God-given rights, for he no longer is a vessel of God but of commerce (the state).

—=—

“The radical element of justice is equality.”

—Prima pars aequitatis aequalitas. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“Equality is equity.”
—Francis’ Max., Max. 3; 4 Bouv. Inst. n. 3725. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

!919
 —=—

“Equity suffers not a right without a remedy.”

—4 Bouv. Inst. n. 3726. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“Equity ACTS UPON THE PERSON.”

“Equity FOLLOWS THE LAW.”
—Aequitas agit in personam. 4 Bouv. Inst. n. 3733. Aequilas sequitier legem. 1 Story, Eq. Jur. §64.; 3 Wooddes. Lect. 479, 482. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“The law sometimes follows equity.”

—Lex aliquando sequitur aequitatem. 3 Wils. 119. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“The law delights in equity; it covets perfection;


it is a rule of right.”
—Lex aequitate guadet; appetit perfectum; est norma recti. Jenk. Cent. 36. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“LAW FEIGNS WHERE EQUITY SUBSISTS.”

—Lex Þngit ubi subsistit aequitas. 11 Co. 90. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“Equity looks upon that as done, which ought to be done.”

4 Bouv. Inst. n. 3729; 1 Fonbl. Eq. b. 1, 16  ch. 6, s. 9, note; 3 Wheat. 563. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“A judge ought always to have equity before his eyes.”

ÑJudex ante occulos aequitatem semper habere debet. Jenk. Cent. 58. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“A judge ought always to regard equity.”

—Judex aeuitatem semper spectare debet. Jenk. Cent. 45. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

!920
 —=—

“A good judge decides according to justice and right, and prefers equity
to strict law.”
—Bonum judex secundum aequum et bonum judicat, et aequitatem stricto juri praefert. Co. Litt. 24. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“Law regards equity.”

—Jus respicit aequitatem. Co. Litt. 24. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“In all affairs, and principally in those which concern the

administration of justice, the rules of equity ought to be followed.”
—In omnibus quidem, maxime tamen in jure, aequitas spectanda sit. 22  Dig. 50, 17, 90. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“He who has committed iniquity, SHALL NOT HAVE EQUITY.”

—Francis’ Max., Max. 2. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“He who will have equity done to him, must do equity to the same person.”
—4 Bouv. Inst. n. 3723. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“IN A FICTION OF LAW, EQUITY ALWAYS SUBSISTS.”

ÑIn Þctione juris, semper subsistit aequitas. 11 Co. 51. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“IT IS AGAINST EQUITY TO DEPRIVE FREEMAN OF THE FREE

DISPOSAL OF THEIR OWN PROPERTY.”
—Iniquum est ingenuis hominibus non esse liberam rerum suarum alienationem. Co. Litt. 223. See 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 455, 460. (Black4)

—=—

“Nothing is more conformable to natural equity, than to conÞrm the will

of an owner WHO DESIRES TO TRANSFER HIS PROPERTY TO
ANOTHER.”
—Nihil tam conveniens est naturali aequitati, quam voluntatem domini voluntis rem suam in alium transferre, ratam haberi. Inst. 2, 1, 40; 1 Co. 100.
(BouvMaxim)

—=—

!921
 —=—

“NECESSITY CREATES EQUITY.”

—(BouvMaxim)

—=—

“A good thing required by necessity is not good beyond the limits of

such necessity.”
—BONUM NECESSARIUM EXTRA TERMINOS NECESSITATIS NON EST BONUM. Hob. 144. (Black4)

—=—

“Perpetuities are odious in law and equity.”

—(BouvMaxim)

—=—

If these don’t yet make sense, remember they are limited to perspective. He who reads and
considers these must remember their own status under the doctrine of master and servant. To a
slave (subject/servant), this legal term of art equity carries a whole different meaning than to a
master. And for the man of God it carries only the Truth and intent of God’s Law. Again, equal
rights (equity) under the law for citizenships (agents) of the United States is no different from what
co-employed, similarly titled hirelings share at the local conglomerate of Walmart stores. Walmart
rights are not necessarily governmentally created rights any more than governmental rights are
Natural (of God).

The justiÞcation for war is always one of necessity, where Ònecessity knows no law.Ó Thus war, out
of necessity, generally creates a state of legal equity (equal oppression, extortion, and punishment
for all). In other words, war resets commercialism by destroying that which opposes or blocks it.
And this is why sanctions are used before war might be declared. But never forget that war is only
ever for commercial purposes, a tool of the devil in a system of mammon.

Comprehending this distinction between equity and all other formalities of law is crucial. For as we
have read here in these maxims, the default state of thought for any judge should be equitableness,
or as that which is in harmony with the Natural Law. We must also remember that these maxims
are preferable but not a requirement. In other words, since the more localized and personal maxim
that contract makes the law also must play in that judges forum and jurisdiction as a foundational
principle, if the contract itself stands in fraud and inequity as agreed upon by the parties then the
judge must also stand in support of the fraud and inequity of that voluntary contract, and so may
not consider equitable means to Þnd remedy, instead following the strict, amoral rule regarding
such contractual relation-ships. Thus the strict law of the voluntary contract defeats the ability of
the judge to act morally even if he wanted to. And the Bible is excluded from his purview and
unenforceable as the common law thereof, for contract law conquers other forms of law. These
maxims and their power over one another are ultra-important to learn, for we can know the judges
opinion before he makes it if we have a full understanding of the principles that will necessarily
and legally guide it. Equity within contract is simply not the same as Natural equity without. And
we have no hope of extracting equitable means from any administrative judge of United States
citizenships, for the contractual relationship destroys the Natural equity principle through juris
strictum, as that strict, written law of persons. Acceptance of the written law destroys the
implications of the unwritten Law, which respects no Þction. The principles of law cannot defeat a
contracted dis-ease, for the terms of the contract are designed to pretend defeat over the

!922
scripturally-based, moral, and unenforceable equitable terms of God’s Law. And what a beautiful
rule to Live by, the same as do unto others and treat thy neighbor as thyself, that to be (have Being/
Life) in True Equity one must always stand in True Equity towards all others regardless of their dis-
position. We should only expect to receive what we put forward.

This defeatism we all suffer as common persons and municeps is generally based on the fact that
positive laws deal with the everyday running, infrastructure, and general services to taxpayers.
Commercial, prima facie laws, however, deal with customers, not taxpayers. And this is why
taxpayers are called (devolved) as the ÒcustomersÓ of most for-proÞt government agencies instead
of taxpayers or citizens. Perhaps you should go check your local municipal corporation (city or
county) bill to see what status of person it is addressed to. Are you a “customer” of government?
Water, sewer, trash, golf, etc…

FACIES - Latin. The face or countenance; the exterior appearance or view; hence,
contemplation or study of a thing on its EXTERNAL or APPARENT side. Thus, prima facie
means at the Þrst inspection, on a preliminary or exterior scrutiny. When we speak of a
“prima facie case,” we mean one which, ON ITS OWN SHOWING, on a Þrst examination, or
WITHOUT INVESTIGATING ANY ALLEGED DEFENSES, is APPARENTLY GOOD AND
MAINTAINABLE. (Black1)

FACIO UT DES - (Latin. I do that you may give.) A species of contract in the civil law (being
one of the innominate contracts) which occurs WHEN A MAN AGREES TO PERFORM
anything for a price either speciÞcally mentioned OR LEFT TO THE DETERMINATION
OF THE LAW TO SET A VALUE ON IT: AS WHEN A SERVANT HIRES HIMSELF TO HIS
MASTER FOR CERTAIN WAGES OR AN AGREED SUM OF MONEY. Also, the
consideration of that species of CONTRACT. (Black4)

FACIO UT FACIAS - (Latin. I do that you may do.) The consideration of that species of
contract in the civil law, or the contract itself (being one of the innominate contracts), which
occurs when I agree with a man to do his work for him if he will do mine for me; OR IF
TWO PERSONS AGREE TO MARRY TOGETHER, OR TO DO ANY OTHER POSITIVE
ACTS ON BOTH SIDES; or it may be TO FORBEAR on one side in consideration of
something done on the other. (Black4)

FACSIMILE - An exact copy, preserving all the MARKS of the ORIGINAL. (Black4)

—=—

Any way you look at it, rent is extortion. Blackmail. It is veiled slavery, as indenture. For the money
we use to pay rent today represents only that commercial current (currency) of time. Money, again,
is just a re-presentation of the physical substance of labor, hours of work in monetary form that can
be traded or used to pay extortion, exaction, or rent. Remember, extortion (as exaction) is a
protected right under Title 42 of US Code, forced upon the public citizenship for his crime of use of
another’s property. In Reality, and in consideration of what the earth provides us in ultra-
abundance if it is cared for in respect of God’s Laws, no man should ever live in such a state of
controlled adversity that he should pay rent to another. And no man should wish to lay such
sufferance upon his fellow man, for no man should be or desire to be lord and master over another.
Rent can and only will ever exist in inequitableness. It is unnatural. But rent is clearly an ancient
custom, part of the cult-ure. And it is quite clear in recorded history that slaves often Þght for their
right at the chance to charge and enslave other slaves as they themselves were so charged; the
strange hierarchical bedfellows of mutual captivity.

So why is a perpetuity considered as a state of inequity in the maxim above? How about perpetual
debt?

!923
 —=—

"...And to preserve their independence, WE MUST NOT LET OUR

RULERS LOAD US WITH PERPETUAL DEBT. We must make our
ELECTION between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If
we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our
drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our
amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England
are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the
twenty-four, and give the earnings of Þfteen of these to the government
for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufÞcient
to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and
potatoes; HAVE NOT TIME TO THINK, NO MEANS OF CALLING
THE MISMANAGER'S TO ACCOUNT; BUT BE GLAD TO OBTAIN
SUBSISTENCE BY HIRING OURSELVES TO RIVET THEIR CHAINS
ON THE NECKS OF OUR FELLOW SUFFERERS..."
—Thomas Jefferson, as quoted in: ‘The Making of America,’ page 395

—=—

Of course, for every rent a user is needed. Someone or something needs to be charged. And so we
Þnd that rent is merely a reoccurring necessity in the artful existence of a permanent state of usury.
We call and accept this quality as Ògovernment.Ó We even anthropomorphize government as Òthe
man!Ó

In deÞning usufruct, as the Cestue Que Vie, we get a glimpse into how the ancient laws and history
were once against our modern form of usury, and how those laws were changed through the
expansion of usufruct upon consumable commodities. Where as before money (currency and coin-
age) could not be altered in its substance into any other form, meaning that its value could not be
arbitrarily changed (inßated and deßated) and usury could not be imbued to increase the
imaginary, uncirculated amount of its value in mammon through an actuarially calculated future
debt as Òinterest,Ó the laws over time and political dispositions thereof were incrementally changed
to make consumable commodities and the exchange currency they are purchased with (money)
into a usurious thing. Thus the consideration of money was changed from one of pure substance
(such as gold or silver) to that of pure form (as our current paper, Þat US dollar). While the sub-
stance could not be altered because it was physical (pure), and whereas nothing artiÞcial could be
begotten from it, the re-presentation of its substance into paper form allowed it to be altered in any
way the issuer and loaner of that paper currency saw Þt, or as they say, artfully created out of thin
air. When artiÞce became money, manÕs person and his property also became money personiÞed.

The form pressed into a gold coin made no difference to the value of the actual gold as the sub-
stance in weight that made up the coin. The value of the gold was the value of the coin. But the
form of a piece of paper that represents value with no actual substance in reference to that value
carries unlimited potential for corruption, greed, and most importantly usury. Likewise, the paper
birth certiÞcate as a commercial paper bank note creates unlimited corruption of the blood, with
unlimited monetary consideration of the mere form (name) of man. The substance of man is re-
presented into the form of a commercial certiÞcate of exchange. Thus, man is re-considered from
substance to form (ßesh and blood to paper), just as money is re-considered from metals, grains, or
livestock into a representative paper form with no substantive reference or actual connection to the

!924
original. In this way, the future calves of those cattle or products of other seeded commodities can
be secured as future currency for today’s debts, for paper can represent anything, even future life in
debt and labor potential. And so the issues as offspring of citizen-ships are collateralized through
the birth registration process to secure the public debt, a debt that can never be paid, only per-
formed in public service and servitude in perpetuity and without equitableness. We call this state
of commercial existence as “equality.” But legal equality is not Natural Equity. All slaves are equal,
but no slave has True (Natural) Equity.

The author wishes to disclaim here that this notion of what is “lawful money” is yet another patriot
mythology. The Bible makes no distinction between any form of money, for slaves were certainly
valued in gold and silver in their commercial trade. All money is the root of all evil. End of story.
And so we must take a quick look at the clever designs of the money-changers so that we may
prove this statement, that there is no such thing as lawful money under God, only under tyrants
and in constituted pirate coves. To say that money is lawful simply means that a certain form of
money was written as the strict law to be lawful, in other words, legal. It means nothing else, and
no, Jehovah does not put Its seal of approval upon any metal or any other form of “money.”

So let us discover how these pure coins of gold and silver were made impure for taxation purposes.
We will do this simply to show that money in any form is the seed of absolute corruption, and all
forms thereof are absolutely corruptible.

Ever ask yourself why 90% gold and silver coins only had 90% gold and silver?

The typical answer by the pat-riot and coin collector would be that the baser (less valuable) metals
admixed therein were included to somehow strengthen the coin for its circulation. And that’s
where they stop, other than to meticulously evaluate the worth of that coin by how it appears to
their ego. Fine, extra-Þne, etc. This is a perfect example of public-mindedness that plagues the
rational of the common goyim.

The actual reason for this admixture of metals was simply a tax; nothing more, nothing less. So
how is a bit of extraneous, lesser valued metal to be taken as a tax?

A sourced Wikipedia article on “Seigniorage” explains how the commonalty is hoodwinked into
paying a tax every time we use money, no matter what its form or substance:

Seigniorage, also spelled seignorage or seigneurage (from Old French seigneuriage "right of the
lord [seigneur] to mint money"), is the difference between the value of money AND THE
COST TO PRODUCE AND DISTRIBUTE IT. The term can be applied in the following ways:

• Seigniorage derived from specie—metal coins—IS A TAX, ADDED TO THE TOTAL

PRICE OF A COIN (metal content and production costs), that a customer of the mint
had to pay to the mint, and that WAS SENT TO THE SOVEREIGN OF THE
POLITICAL AREA.

• Seigniorage derived from notes is more INDIRECT, being the difference between
interest earned on securities acquired in exchange for bank notes and the costs of
producing and distributing those notes.

The term also applies to monetary seignorage, WHERE SOVEREIGN-ISSUED SECURITIES

ARE EXCHANGED FOR NEWLY MINTED BANK NOTES BY A CENTRAL BANK, thus
allowing the sovereign to 'borrow' without needing to repay. However, monetary seignorage
refers to the SOVEREIGN REVENUE OBTAINED THROUGH ROUTINE DEBT
MONETIZATION, INCLUDING EXPANDING THE MONEY SUPPLY during GDP growth
and meeting yearly inßation targets.

Seigniorage is a convenient source of revenue for some governments.

—=—

!925
To make this clear, it was the added metals that made coins only 90% gold or silver. But the user
and purchaser paid for the coin as if it were 100% gold or silver. That 10% over pay, which is Þlled
in with baser metals of low value, is called a tax of seigniorage. And every time that coin is spent
the tax is repeated, over and over and over. This tax is also included with the current dollar and
other currencies of the many nations. The US mint even reports this tax of seigniorage as one of its
added proÞts within its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). In fact, before a dollar
bill even leaves the press itÕs issued upon itÕs taxed for over half its value ($0.50+) for seigniorage
before it ever reaches its Þrst bank or wallet. The penny now costs way more than 1 cent to produce
as the nickel is barely holding its own. This over-cost of producing each penny is also called as
seigniorage.

Legal equality… ironically, this is a convoluted way of saying simply that man is patriated into
citizen-ship, virtually recreated into a strawman in his own mind. And just what does it mean for a
commercial entity to be patriotic of his own voluntary enslavement, to love his government
corporation (artiÞcial person) in blasphemy to God, and to love the money (of mammon) that
represents his own nativity and valuation as human capital?

PATRIOTISM - noun - LOVE OF ONE'S COUNTRY; the passion which aims TO SERVE
one's country, either in defending it from invasion, or protecting ITS rights and maintaining
ITS laws and institutions in vigor and purity. Patriotism is the CHARACTERISTIC OF A
GOOD CITIZEN, the noblest passion that ANIMATES A MAN IN THE CHARACTER OF
A CITIZEN. (Webs1828)

—=—

Cartoon characters in a cartoon worldÉ

Love of God or love of country? Man must love one and not the other, for the love of one
necessarily destroys the law of the other. But which was here Þrst? Whose land is It Really? Who
Created It?

When comparing national citizen-ship (nativity) to the tribal nature of the former condition of
Native American Indians and their love of the land, we can Truly see the difference between this
legal, Þnancial protectionism of surety and insurance as opposed to the Highest negative duties of
spiritual, brotherly Love and Charity.

—=—

“When people are destroyed and LANGUAGES ARE DESTROYED,

YOU DESTROY THAT KNOWLEDGE ALONG WITH IT. So what do
indigenous people have to offer? Indigenous people have the LONG-
TERM THINKING required for proper context.”


ÒWhat Indians are about, I think, Þrst of all is community. They're about
mutual support. They're about sharing. They're about understanding
what's common land, common air, common water, common and FOR
ALL. They're about freedom.”


“We are now. Now is us. We're the seventh generation. I'm sitting here
as the seventh generation BECAUSE SEVEN GENERATIONS AGO

!926
 PEOPLE WERE LOOKING OUT FOR ME. SEVEN GENERATIONS
FROM NOW SOMEONE WILL BE HERE, I KNOW. EACH
GENERATION MAKES SURE THAT SEVENTH GENERATION IS
COMING, ALL THE TIME.”


—Chief Oren Lyons, from an interview with Bill Moyers on July 3, 1991, as aired on ‘Public Affairs Television’

—=—

Is our accumulation of Ònational debtÓ in any way supposed to be a beneÞt to our future
generations? Or have we secured our children into a sort of bondage that cannot even be fathomed
but by the Þnal chapters of the Bible?

Countries (corporations) exist in purposeful spitefulness of God and the Natural, spiritual Law. It
can be no other way, for government and religion are not the self-evident designs of God’s Nature,
not in Being of the Supreme Permanence of Jehovah, and have no relation to Real Life. They are
only dead, Þctional things and therefore can only relate to dead, Þctional persons, places, and
things (nouns/names/ßattering titles).

A ÒChristian nationÓ has nothing of its legalistic law written in any way according to the Bible
scriptures. If it did, there would be no purpose for any other law, and thus no purpose for that so-
called government and its administrative gods. God’s Law is unwritten, voluntary, and un-
enforceable. When considering just the banking law alone as compared to scripture, this conclusion
is self-evident. Commercialism would be outlawed if the Law of God was being followed and
exempliÞed through christ. Charity would be the only True Law, for one of the supreme purposes
of Charity is that of avoiding exactly the artiÞcial debts we Þnd ourselves in today. Debt and
artiÞcial authority go hand in hand. Nations are identiÞed by the strength of their currency (gross
national product valued in money). The gods of the nations are built upon debt. Countries are only
created by false-magistrate gods seeking to bypass the moral law and rule over others through
debt, for countries are simply not Creations of God in Nature. Thus, patriotism is a state of artiÞcial
being and belief in the veracity of Þction that is totally against GodÕs Design and Law in favor of
manÕs. The love of (belief in) Þction can be simply deÞned as patriotism.

—=—

“Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”



—Samuel Johnson, quoted from Boswell’s: ‘Life of Johnson’

—=—

So love of country is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Thus love of the Þction that allows a scoundrel
to exist legally (against GodÕs Law) is the True purpose of patriotism. No surprise, for the victim
often loves his captor and corruptor, and the patriot enjoys the insured licensure (anarchy) to break
with his own personal responsibility under God, being legally allowed to commit crimes against
Nature and against Self.

In The Matrix movies, it was stated that anyone plugged into The Matrix was “a potential agent.” As
science Þction this was cool, but in Real Life this is also a veriÞable Truism. This was not just
science Þction, but a metaphor of the legal Þction, for all men in the legal Þction are actors that rely
on the central AI for their pretended but artiÞcial lives, as the registered agents of assigned legal
personas, acting in an agentic and dependent way towards oneÕs master and principal. Patriotism,
the love of the artiÞce of the Þctional nation, causes all men to be potential enemies to any Free man
under God. The patriot loves Þction over Nature, loving his nation over his own Natural Freedom

!927
and the government and its legal laws over that of God’s. And so the typical DMV worker, for
instance, certainly plays the part of an agent, treating their fellow man in citizen-ship with a con-
tempt only possible through the ßattering titles conferred upon such slightly inßated govern-ment
agents. The agent always defends its principal, for without such a master that servant’s status and
subsequent beneÞts and protections in and because of that servitude and ßattering legal title would
not exist. So all men acting in the persona of government are agents thereof, including all common
citizenships, and their patriotism may be invoked at any time due to their vested interest in the
legal systems that feed and falsely enrich them. We defend, in other words, not merely the teat we
suck from, but that which it is attached to. We must do this or our make-believe persona will cease
to exist, and so our fear of God would no longer be obscured. It is our artiÞcial womb, our legal
matrix (mother). Thus, the entire public population are turned into enemies of each other, in-
formers and betrayers, as agents of the machine. For in order to retain our legally bestowed, un-
natural beneÞts we must support the hand that feeds us over that of the very Nature and Natural
Equity of all that is Jehovah. We must abandon God (Reality) and embrace the Þction of the legal
matrix.

The simulacrum is made legally true…

—=—

“Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the
citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged
sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And
when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils
with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in
seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, THE CITIZENRY, INFUSED
WITH FEAR AND BLINDED BY PATRIOTISM, WILL OFFER UP ALL
OF THEIR RIGHTS UNTO THE LEADER AND GLADLY SO. How do I
know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.”
–Parabolically attributed to Julius Caesar (e.g., district/seizure)

—=—

Patriotism is not the fear of God, as the fear of what will happen by not following that Law of
Nature, but instead is the fear of government, as the fear of not selling our souls to that Þction and
against God.

Let’s break this word patriotism down into its selective parts, shall we, and then examine what it is
to be a pat-riot?

PAT - adjective - FIT; CONVENIENT; EXACTLY SUITABLE EITHER AS TO TIME OR

PLACE. [Not an elegant word, but admissible in burlesque.] - adverb - Fitly; conveniently.
(Webs1828)

RIOT - noun - 1. In a general sense, tumult; uproar; hence technically, in law, A RIOTOUS
ASSEMBLING of twelve persons or more, and NOT DISPERSING UPON
PROCLAMATION. The deÞnition of riot must depend on the laws. In Connecticut, the
assembling of three persons or more, to do an unlawful act by violence against the person or
property of another, and not dispersing upon proclamation, is declared to be a riot. In
Massachusetts and New Hampshire, the number necessary to constitute a riot is twelve. 2.
Uproar; wild and noisy festivity. 3. Excessive and expensive feasting. 2 Peter 2:13. 


!928
4. LUXURY. The lamb thy riot dooms to bleed today. To run riot TO ACT OR MOVE
WITHOUT CONTROL OR RESTRAINT. - verb intransitive - 1. To revel; to run to excess in
feasting, drinking or other sensual indulgences. 2. To luxuriate; to be highly excited. No
pulse that riots, and no blood that glows. 3. To banquet; TO LIVE IN LUXURY; TO ENJOY.
How base is the ingratitude which forgets the benefactor, while it is rioting on the beneÞt!
4. To raise an uproar or sedition. (Webs1828)

PATRIOT - noun - [Latin patria, ONE'S NATIVE COUNTRY, from pater, FATHER.] A
PERSON who LOVES his country, and ZEALOUSLY supports and defends IT and ITS
interests. Such tears as patriots shed for dying laws. - adjective - Patriotic; DEVOTED TO THE
WELFARE OF ONE'S COUNTRY; as patriot zeal. (Webs1828)

ZEAL - noun - [Gr., Latin] Passionate ardor in the pursuit of any THING. In general, zeal is an
eagerness of desire to accomplish or obtain some object, and IT MAY BE MANIFESTED
EITHER IN FAVOR OF ANY PERSON OR THING, OR IN OPPOSITION TO IT, AND IN
A GOOD OR BAD CAUSE… They have a zeal of God, BUT NOT ACCORDING TO
KNOWLEDGE. Romans 10:2. A ZEAL FOR LIBERTY IS SOMETIMES AN EAGERNESS
TO SUBVERT, WITH LITTLE CARE WHAT SHALL BE ESTABLISHED. (Webs1828)

PATRON - In ordinary usage one who PROTECTS, countenances, or SUPPORTS SOME

PERSON OR THING; ONE WHO HABITUALLY EXTENDS MATERIAL ASSISTANCE; a
regular CUSTOMER; A PROTECTOR OR BENEFACTOR. In ecclesiastical law. He who has
the right, title, power, or privilege of presenting to an ecclesiastical beneÞce. In Roman law.
THE FORMER MASTER OF AN EMANCIPATED SLAVE. In French marine law. The
captain or MASTER OF A VESSEL. (Black4)

PATRON - noun - [Latin patronus; Gr. FATHER.] 1. Among the Romans, a master who had
freed his slave, AND RETAINED SOME RIGHTS OVER HIM AFTER HIS
EMANCIPATION; also, a man of distinction UNDER WHOSE PROTECTION ANOTHER
PLACED HIMSELF. Hence, 2. One who countenances, supports and protects either a person
or a work. 3. In the church of Rome, a guardian or saint, WHOSE NAME A PERSON BEARS,
or under whose special care he is placed AND WHOM HE INVOKES; or a saint in whose
name a church or order is founded. 4. In the canon or common law, one who has the gift and
disposition of a beneÞce. 5. AN ADVOCATE; A DEFENDER; one that specially
countenances and supports, or lends aid to advance; AS PATRONS OF THE ARTS; A
PATRON OF USEFUL UNDERTAKINGS; the patrons of virtue. 6. In seamen's language, the
commander of a small vessel or passage-boat; also, one who steers a ship's long boat.
(Webs1828)

PATRONATUS - Latin. In Roman law. The condition, relation, right, or duty of a patron. In
ecclesiastical law. Patronage. (Black4)

PATRONAGE - noun - Special countenance or support; favor or aid afforded TO SECOND

THE VIEWS OF A PERSON or TO PROMOTE A DESIGN. 1. Guardianship, as of a saint. 2.
Advowson; the right of presentation to a church or ecclesiastical beneÞce. - verb transitive - To
patronize or support… (Webs1828)

PATRONIZE - To act as a patron, extend patronage, countenance, encourage, favor. (Black4)

PATRONUS - Latin. In Roman law. A modiÞcation of the Latin word pater, FATHER. A
denomination applied by Romulus to the Þrst senators of Rome, and which they always
afterwards bore. A person who stood in the relation of PROTECTOR TO ANOTHER who
was called his "client." One who ADVISED his client in matters of law, and advocated his
causes in court. (Black4)

!929
PATRIMONY - Any kind of PROPERTY. Such estate as has DESCENDED IN THE SAME
FAMILY; estates which have descended OR BEEN DEVISED IN A DIRECT LINE FROM
THE FATHER, and, by extension, from the mother or other ancestor. It has been held that
THE WORD IS NOT NECESSARILY RESTRICTED TO PROPERTY INHERITED
DIRECTLY FROM THE FATHER. (Black4)

PATRIMONIAL - Pertaining to a patrimony; inherited from ancestors, but strictly from the
direct male ancestors. (Black4)

PATRINUS - In old ecclesiastical law. A GODFATHER. (Black4)

PATROCINIUM - In Roman law. Patronage; protection; defense. The BUSINESS or DUTY

of a patron or advocate. (Black4)

GODFATHER - noun - The man who is sponsor for a child at baptism, who promises to
answer for his future conduct and that he shall follow a life of piety, by this means LAYING
HIMSELF UNDER AN INDISPENSABLE OBLIGATION TO INSTRUCT THE CHILD
AND WATCH OVER HIS CONDUCT. This practice is of high antiquity in the christian
church, and was probably intended TO PREVENT CHILDREN FROM BEING BROUGHT
UP IN IDOLATRY, in case the parents died before the children had arrived to years of
discretion. In the catholic church the number of godfathers and godmothers is reduced to two;
in the church of England, to three; but formerly the number was not limited. - verb transitive -
To ACT as godfather; TO TAKE UNDER ONE'S FOSTERING CARE. (Webs1828)

CLIENT - noun - 1. Among the Romans, a citizen WHO PUT HIMSELF UNDER THE
PROTECTION of a man of distinction and inßuence, who, in respect to that relation, was
called his PATRON. Hence in modern usage, 2. One who applies to a lawyer or counselor for
advice and direction in a question of law, or commits his cause to his management in
prosecuting a claim, or defending against a suit, in a court of justice. 3. A DEPENDENT.
(Webs1828)

DEFENDER - noun - ONE WHO DEFENDS BY OPPOSITION; one who maintains,

supports, protects or vindicates; an assertor; a vindicator, EITHER BY ARMS OR BY
ARGUMENTS; a champion or AN ADVOCATE. (Webs1828)

FOR - preposition - [Latin per; The English, for; to forbid. for corresponds in sense with the
Latin pro… The radical sense of for is to go, to pass, to advance, to reach or stretch.] 1.
AGAINST; IN THE PLACE OF; AS A SUBSTITUTE OR EQUIVALENT, NOTING EQUAL
VALUE OR SATISFACTORY COMPENSATION, either in barter and sale, IN CONTRACT,
or in punishment. 'And Joseph gave them bread in exchange for horses, and for ßocks, and for
the cattle of the herds;Õ that is, according to the original, he gave them bread against horses like
the Gr. Genesis 48:17. Buy us and our land for bread. Genesis 47:19. And if any mischief follow,
then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
Exodus 21:2. 2. IN THE PLACE OF; INSTEAD OF; NOTING SUBSTITUTION OF
PERSONS, OR AGENCY OF ONE IN THE PLACE OF ANOTHER WITH EQUIVALENT
AUTHORITY. AN ATTORNEY IS EMPOWERED TO ACT FOR HIS PRINCIPAL. Will you
take a letter and deliver it for me at the post ofÞce? that is, in my place, or for my beneÞt. 3. In
exchange of; noting one thing taken or given in place of another; as, to quit the profession of
law for that of a clergyman. 4. In the place of; instead of; as, to translate a poem line for line. 5.
IN THE CHARACTER OF; noting resemblance; a sense derived from SUBSTITUTION OR
STANDING IN THE PLACE OF, like in the Greek. If a man can be fully assured of any thing
for a truth, without having examined, what is there that he may not embrace FOR truth? É
14. Because; on account of; by reason of. He cried out for anguish. I cannot go for want of time.
For this cause, I cannot believe the report… 23. TOWARDS; WITH TENDENCY TO, OR IN
FAVOR OF. It is for his honor to retire from ofÞce. It is for our quiet to have few intimate
connections. 24. NOTWITHSTANDING; AGAINST; IN OPPOSITION TO. The fact may be

!930
 so, for any thing that has yet appeared. The task is great, but for all that, I shall not be deterred
from undertaking it. This is a different application of the sense of numbers 1, 2, 3, 4… 25. FOR
THE USE OF; TO BE USED IN; that is, TOWARDS, NOTING ADVANTAGE… 27. In
proportion to; or rather, LOOKING TOWARDS, REGARDING. He is tall for one of his years,
or tall for his age. 28. BY MEANS OF… (Webs1828)

—=—

Talk about word magic! I’d use the colloquialism here that you can’t make this stuff up, but my whole
point is that the complete opposite is True, that a language this demeaning and deceiving is in fact
and can only be total make-believe. The problem is not that all words in legalese are lies, it is that
such authority is given to that whole lingual system of lies. Could you have ever imagined that to
be for anything is to actually be against it? If I support a wall, do I not put that support against it to
prop it up? Does it make sense to you that to defend is to actually oppose?

—=—

“Just look at us. EVERYTHING IS BACKWARDS, EVERYTHING IS

UPSIDE DOWN. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice,
psychiatrists destroy minds, scientists destroy truth, major media
destroys information, RELIGIONS DESTROY SPIRITUALITY AND
GOVERNMENTS DESTROY FREEDOM.”
―Michael Ellner

—=—

To defend evil is to be an agent for evil, to act in protection of it or in its place (stead). This is a very
difÞcult concept. But let us consider the current Queen of England and its corporate state Church of
England. A defender of any faith (trust) is an attorney (agent) for (in the stead of) that which it
opposes. In other words, the queen (or king ) of England is the vicar of the pope (false Christ),
acting vicariously of but in support of (as controlled opposition) the Vatican and its Holy See. To be
a defender of any form of the secular forms of legal “Christianity,” of the universal (catholic) Faith
is to be an offender to the True Nature of the Word of God. The queen of England, that immortal
corporation sole of the Crown, is not opposed to the pope, but a defender of its franchise that she
operates as god-head over. All things are opposite in evil. What is created by the sovereign to stand
against its own sovereignty is that which is by its own nature a defender of it.

And so to be a ÒprotestantÓ (in pro-test) is not quite what you might have been lead to believe it is.
To protest is to afÞrm, and to afÞrm is to give support to, to be for something. And so the ßattering
religious title of “Protestant” turns out to be merely another defender of the same old Catholic
Faith, a controlled opposition.

PROTEST - verb intransitive - [Latin protestor; pro and testor, to afÞrm it.] 1. TO AFFIRM
WITH SOLEMNITY; to make a solemn declaration of a fact or opinion; as, I protest to you, I
have no knowledge of the transaction. 2. To make a solemn declaration expressive of
opposition; with against; as, he protests against your votes. The conscience has power to
protest against the exorbitancies of the passions. 3. To make a formal declaration in writing
against a public law or measure. IT IS THE PRIVILEGE of any lord in parliament to protest
against a law or resolution… (Webs1828)

—=—

!931
To be clear, patriotism for the United States by its subjected citizenships is literally controlled
opposition. No slave in right mindedness would love his master, though the illusion of romance
and even idol Godliness of any nation by its citizen-slaves certainly solidiÞes the relation-ship. All
citizen-ships are without choice defenders of the US trust because persons are property of the
United States, defending the artiÞcial faith (legal trust) of tyrants in mammon through pat-riotism,
which inversely stands as a legal opposition to our own individual freedom of movement and
action without such bar and restraint. It is a state of loving the laws and money forms that bind
ourselves and others in subjection to debt (purchased protection). It is a state of riotous behavior
streamlined and directly funneled into a speciÞc, reorganized, and thus useful cause in support of
the very thing that oppresses, which is of course the needs and justiÞcation of the state in
international commercial activity under a war ßag (Arms) at sea. Between a bee hive, a hornets
nest, and ant colony, and the United States… what’s the difference? Commercialism of human
capital management through contracted (voluntary) employment (use) in corporations (artiÞcial
persons) is the most organized form of slavery in existence, causing men to love their servitude for
love of money, which may only be obtained through legal means such as employment of persons
(prostitution). Military structures and rankings are also set up in this way, the murdering soldiers
mere mercenaries just following the orders of their striped and marked, ßatteringly titled patrons.

—=—

“Borders are scratched across the hearts of men

By strangers with a calm, judicial pen,
And when the borders bleed we watch with dread
The lines of ink across the map turn red.”
—Marya Mannes, from: Subverse: Rhymes for Our Times, 1959

—=—

This strange behavior and love does not beneÞt the ÒpatriotÓ in any way, for the patriot is just
cannon-fodder for the state, and is contractually obligated to serve the state (an artiÞcial person/
god) in Life and/or death as its slave and defender. However, the patriot is convinced that he is
better off with the state, and so the beneÞts entailed with that servitude cannot be ignored, and the
murder of millions by the standing army of that state and its police (peace-keepers of commerce)
are thus patriotically accepted and even cheered for by such pat-riots as part of a prosperous
citizenship. The patriot cheers for his captor and feeds from its teat in utter dependence thereof.
Foreigners must die and suffer in destruction so that we may exist and live (evil) in controlled and
taxed intercourse.

All of our energies and awareness must be redirected into supporting utterly the Þction and its
infrastructure to further facilitate and ensure our own dead existence therein. And today, most
employments are meaningless in every way, supporting only the artiÞcial intelligence systems and
coded language of information and money. From bank tellers to computer programmers to lawyers
to systems analysts, the entire structure of employment has been driven toward the building and
maintenance of the artiÞce of this legal (satanic) matrix.

Pat = to be controlled.
Riot = violent opposition.
Ism = a state of being.

Patriotism is literally just a permanent state of being used (employed) as controlled opposition in
support of tyranny. It’s called public citizenship. It causes men to love and worship that which
oppresses them. For only a slave-holder creates the title of slave, and only a sovereign nation
creates the title of citizenship. We love our captors; love our nativity. This is akin to Stockholm
Syndrome.

!932
 —=—

“It is lamentable, that TO BE A GOOD PATRIOT ONE MUST

BECOME THE ENEMY OF THE REST OF MANKIND.”
—Voltaire, Philosophical Dictionary

—=—

“Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other

countries because you were BORN in it.”

“You’ll never have a quiet world till you knock the patriotism out of the
human race.”
—George Bernard Shaw (separate quotes)

—=—

“To him in whom LOVE dwells, the whole world is but one family.”
—Buddha

—=—

“Patriotism is often an arbitrary veneration of REAL ESTATE ABOVE

PRINCIPLES.”
—George Jean Nathan

—=—

“A nation is A SOCIETY UNITED BY A DELUSION ABOUT ITS

ANCESTRY and by common hatred of its neighbours.”
—William R. Inge

—=—

“Patriotism is a kind of RELIGION; it is the egg from which wars are

hatched.”
—Guy de Maupassant

—=—

“Patriotism is the willingness to kill and be killed for trivial reasons.”

—Bertrand Russell

—=—

!933
 —=—

“To me, it seems a dreadful indignity to have a soul controlled by

geography.”
—George Santayana

—=—

So what happens when the state becomes the father and god-father of every man through birth
citizen-ship within its own pretended kingdom of geographical jurisdiction? Exactly what you see
today…

The state becomes the legal father (patron saint) of the fatherless — the abandoned (delivered)
infant of unknown parentage, a child of the people born of the nation and within its bond of
nativity. All men defend the state by displaying its artiÞcial Arms (ßag and seal) instead of that of
their own paternal bloodline. One must abandon God’s Permanent Law to be adopted by the gods
under legal laws. One must continually patronize that artiÞce as a surrogate father or it will cease
to exist (as a lie). And one must allow themselves to be chargeable as to the rents and extortions that
keep government running in immortal, corporate self-perpetuation.

This is why kings and queens are called “Defenders of the Faith,” defense by pretended moral/
political opposition. For the Faith cannot defend itself, and so it must be defended by the legal,
militarized state. Only a thing standing in opposition to the Natural order requires a defender, for
to defend any of the corporate church doctrines is to stand in opposition to God and the self-
evidence of the knowledge written in those scriptures, which clearly defy and warn against all
other doctrines of ÒpersonsÓ in Òßattering titlesÓ such as kings, queens, and magistrates. Only that
which is opposed to Nature need prove itself to falsely exist as a conÞrmed and ratiÞed lie, as these
“Defenders of the Faith” must do. For the church is only the form, the noun, not the substance that
is the verb of Jehovah and the self-evident Law (Word/Son), and its so-called faith merely a legally
(anti-God) constituted trust. But only one that has no True Faith in God’s Nature and Law needs an
artiÞcial, legal trust to replace one’s own shortcomings. To worship by way of a perpetual
corporation sole is to worship in name (noun) and empty title only. Church and State rely on each
other to exist (as a patronizing, mutually supportive lie).

—=—

“[The Catechism is] a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial

communion and a sure norm for teaching the Faith.”
—Pope John Paul II , from the apostolic constitution ‘Fidei depositum'

—=—

And what “Faith” (legalized truth) is that exactly, because it certainly is not the Word of Jehovah,
which commanded respect of no other doctrines and no other gods?

CATECHISM - noun - 1. A form of instruction by means of questions and answers,

particularly in THE PRINCIPLES OF RELIGION. 2. An elementary book containing A
SUMMARY OF PRINCIPLES IN ANY SCIENCE OR ART, but appropriately in religion,
reduced to the form of questions and answers, and sometimes with notes, explanations, AND
REFERENCES TO AUTHORITIES. (Webs1828)

—=—

!934
And to which authority of the false church are we to vicariously turn to in the stead of christ in
Jehovah (the Word/Law/Son)?

A footnote to the English language (dog-Latin) version of the 1994 Catechism, sometimes referred
to as the “4 pillars of the faith,” states that it is “subject to revision…” depending on changes made
to the Latin original. Really? Because I don’t think the Bible makes such a disclaimer. But then,
anyone that is insane enough to believe himself to be the ofÞcial Christ on Earth would certainly
also allow himself to alter the words of christ in the Bible. The sources for the words in the
Catechism are listed as Scriptures, the Church Fathers, the Ecumenical Councils and other
authoritative Catholic statements, principally those issued by recent popes, this according to the
Vatican website for the Catechism of the Catholic Church, as an apostolic letter.

I should not need to tell you at this point what the word Roman does when attached to the term
Catholic (universal) Church. For the Roman law is certainly opposed to that of God’s. History
apparently reveals to us that the Romans killed the True followers of christ’s teachings just as they
were tricked by the Jews to beat, torture, and crucify christ, as those free men under God who
would not join under CaesarÕs false ßattering marks and titles, who of course fed them promptly to
the lions in the colosseum as sport and entertainment for the pagan, false “Christian” masses,
which need bread and circus to be mentally and physically sedated in their own nativity. Today we
call it “professional sports,” and it has the same stupefying effect. Those who followed christ
would not follow Caesar, according to their True Faith in Jehovah. The incorruptible and therefore
uncontrollable men of christ were tortured and used for sport in the coliseum, not the good titled-
citizen “Christians” of that “Christian Nation” that were mere Pagans in disguise and whom, in the
stands of the colosseum, cheered the loudest at the death of what they could never in Reality be-
come or follow. The path is narrow. A Roman (pagan) of any nation of Caesar (seizure under man’s
district and law) cannot also be a follower of christ.

The church has its patron saints, just as the country has its patriotic fathers. Both are Defenders of the
legal incorporation of Faith, not the spiritual Reality of God’s Nature. Legal faith is stripped from
its verb (works) and made into a noun (status), a legal form in name only. To believe and pledge
faith to government and doctrinal religion is simply not to act in the Pure Faith, Love, and Charity
of God’s Commandments and Law of Nature. “Members” are but servants subject to the laws of
their Þctional master, not of Jehovah, for they worship and have faith only in Þctional persona.
“Christians” of the corporate denominations are mere vessels of the municipal and religious in-
corporation of commerce, not men of God. For they have gods other than that of Jehovah in both
the state and in the church and place their faith in them through non-scriptural, unnatural, sacred
(cursed) ceremony and ritual. The “true faith” (lie) of Rome and England is simply not based in
Reality, and certainly not respectful of Its self-evident and thus Supreme Law and Permanence of
Being (verb).

Controlled opposition… problem, reaction, solution.

Ironically, patriotism for many folks stems from a religious fervor and zeal for “God and country.”
More properly, it is the blind support of a nation as if somehow the nation and its gods in
magistracy are gifts from Jehovah. This patently ridiculous thought process is not only totally
against scriptural teachings and an assault on reason, but is also a necessary state of mind that
must be instilled into the common plebes through wrongful education in public-mindedness, for
without such patriotic zeal the nation would fall and its gods would be seen as what they really are
— mere pirates and criminal conspirators (confederates); fragile old men hiding behind the very
might of those which they have cheated and fooled into protecting them in patronage, as the old
man behind the wizarding curtain of the technology (art) of Oz. The military of the United States is
perhaps the greatest pat riot on earth, as million of men doing what they are told by the most
corrupting element and nation upon this earth while having no idea what it is they are actually
Þghting for. The Babylonian woeÉ

!935
Patriotism is the support of organized chaos, the legal anarcho-syndicalist and capitalist system
that we call our Þctional government today. Suitable indulgence, Þt luxuriation, and convenient
blasphemy are protected states (legal statuses) within that artiÞcial womb of its legal matrix. This is
nothing more or less than institutionalized paganism, just as it was and is in Rome.

GENTILE - noun - [Latin gentilis; from Latin gens, NATION, race; applied to PAGANS.] In the
scriptures, a pagan; a worshipper of false gods; any person not a Jew or a christian; a
heathen. The Hebrews included in the term GOIM or NATIONS, all the tribes of men who
had not received the true faith, and were not circumcised. The christians translated goim by
the Latin gentes, and imitated the Jews in giving the name gentiles TO ALL NATIONS who
were not Jews nor christians. In civil affairs, the denomination was given to ALL NATIONS
WHO WERE NOT ROMANS. - adjective - Pertaining to pagans or heathens. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is up to the reader to decide whether or not a patriot (in a pat riot) can worship anything but false
gods. The evidence is forthwith presented, and fools may be suffered perhaps more so by God than
by myself, a fault I am trying to work on. As we can see throughout the tales of recorded history, a
slave often loves (believes in) and thus unreasonably defends his despotic master even when he
dislikes him very much. It is often the case that being vested in a system that grants beneÞts creates
patrons of that system. Cognitive dissonance allows for many crimes by man against his fellow
man and against all of Nature while acting in the Þction of a personal, logical fallacy. This author
will not be your judge, only whatever is Jehovah may take that place.

—=—

“And if ye call on the Father, WHO WITHOUT RESPECT OF PERSONS

JUDGETH ACCORDING TO EVERY MAN'S WORK, pass the time of
your sojourning here in fear: Forasmuch as ye know that YE WERE
NOT REDEEMED WITH CORRUPTIBLE THINGS, AS SILVER AND
GOLD, FROM YOUR VAIN CONVERSATION RECEIVED BY
TRADITION FROM YOUR FATHERS…”
—1 Peter 1:17-18, KJB

—=—

I have begun to think that somewhere along the line that the notion of parenting and respect of
elders became very much attuned to the ire and unreasonable demands of the priest-class, where
their methods, customs, and laws are simply not to be publicly questioned despite their obvious
ßaws and logical fallacies. We never like to think of our parents as our enemies, but perhaps we
need to realize this is so in a spiritual capacity through no fault of their own, and even as we Love
them and they Love us. For we are told to love our enemies, but not the designs of them. To not
obey GodÕs Law of Nature simply because our parents were culturally and educationally trained
by their parents to do so is ludicrous. In fact, if we stop and consider, these bloodlines of kings and
nobility standing in the pretended sovereignty of their parents are equally insane for following the
traditions of their parents (fathers) and People. Neither of us have any excuse for our behavior, not
the master or the slave, except to lie to ourselves and declare that this is just the way it is and always
has been. Really? Because this assumes that a time somehow did not Exist without mankind and its
artful designs present therein, and that Nature could not Exist without man! That doesnÕt even jive
with the New Testament, let alone with deductive reasoning. And this assumes a time in Real
history when men had no language never Existed either! This assumes that men are and have
always been born in Nature as the words and deÞnitions of ÒmastersÓ or Òslaves,Ó that these are the
Designs of God and Nature. And that is patently ridiculous.

!936
When one is governed by the force and fear of man’s legal punishments upon his person instead of
being self-governed by the fear of God’s judgement in Nature and his mistreatment of it as a whole,
with respect for the deceit and acknowledgement of that false, invisible person-hood and ßattering
titles, man can know only corruption of his soul. There is no other option while living in
personhood, for its foundation is purely of artiÞce. The individual soul is nothing if not the spirit of
Jehovah in everything that Exists. Thus, it is only a reasonable conclusion that how we respect and
treat Jehovah’s Creation (Nature) is how we will be judged, which includes the way we treat each
other and our Selves. Indeed, it is written so in the nightmares of Revelation.

—=—

“And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books
were opened: and another book was opened, WHICH IS THE BOOK OF
LIFE: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written
in the books, ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS. And the SEA gave up
the dead which were in it; and DEATH AND HELL DELIVERED UP
THE DEAD which were in them: AND THEY WERE JUDGED EVERY
MAN ACCORDING TO THEIR WORKS.”
—Revelation 20: 12-13, KJB

—=—

The word sea is used with a double meaning here and throughout the Bible, and Þguratively
applies to everything in the unspiritual and artiÞcial aspects of the world, or all “worldly” things,
deÞned as Òall the world.Ó And so to be given up to God from the sea is a Þgurative reference to
spiritually dead persons living civil lives in the commerce of cities and nations, those upon the
commercial sea, as the multitude of spiritually dead goyim of the nations, and of course we cannot
forget the Holy See of the Vatican city-state. We are judged upon our Life and works therein, nor by
our words, for each of our Lives is an open book to God, and we cannot hide our action or inaction
behind dead things and dead pledges. Our works are only ever our own. Our silence is also our
own.

This is a wonderful parable, teaching a moral lesson in perfect self-evidence. As a parabolic

teaching it cannot be denied. The history though, as the personiÞcation of the narration of the story,
is what causes the moral to be lost upon man in his arrogance of ignorance and pursuit of some
history and proof of artiÞce, he who is lost in the Roman calendric time and valuation scheme in
mammon. Though no speciÞc man is mentioned by name here, and instead all men in all the
world, the fact that Jehovah (God) is personiÞed into a usable form for story purposes is what is
disputed as making this a false story. Only an idiot, or for that matter a public-minded fool
educated only at the whim of a powerful but false church and state, would dismiss such self-
evidently taught knowledge on such moronic grounds. Again, I should know, for I am only
recently awakened from my own dead slumber and self-conceit. So do not be insulted by these
words, as the Truth in its self-evident form can only work against our own ego, killing our false
strawman id-entity. The only lies that subsist in false existence are the ones we tell and accept for
our false personas, behind our masks. There are no lies under God’s Nature; no artful comforts in
insured and safe places, and certainly no artiÞcial matrixes (wombs) to hide in.

Man must be converted into following Þction over Nature, and this process is implemented at birth
and carried forth through the public indoctrination centers called public schools. Hypnotically
ßashing television, movies, and video games Þll in the rest. We grow up being conversant in legal
volunteerism.

!937
The word conversation as a noun is from the mid 14th century, meaning a state of "living together,
having dealings with others," and also as a "manner of conducting oneself in the world,” from
the Old French conversation, from Latin conversationem (nominative conversatio), meaning the “act of
living with;” a noun of action from past participle stem of conversari “to live with, keep company
with,” and literally “turn about with,” from Latin com- (with) and -vertare, frequentative of vertere
(versus). It has the speciÞc sense of Òtalk” from the 1570s. Conversation has also been commercially
used as a synonym for "sexual intercourse" from at least 1511, hence criminal conversation is a
legal term used for ADULTERY from at least the late 18th century.

Naturally, the most conversant way that we have intercourse with each other is through language,
which is why these terms of art are obfuscated in their higher meanings and why the public is kept
in darkness, the false light of that which is adversarial. Only if our conversation is controlled
utterly with babel and nonsense can we be made to be controlled through it. Words are indeed the
most powerful weapons ever imagined and designed by men. Nothing else even comes close. For it
is words and words alone that cause men to go to war with each other and on behalf of the words
that deÞne their government, its name, and its subscribed-to ideology.

The word converse in adjective form, as to be converse in one's actions, is to be the "EXACT
OPPOSITE," from the Latin conversus "turn around," past participle of convertere "to turn
about" (CONVERT). Originally a mathematical term, the noun is attested from the 1550s. Related:
Conversely. In its verb form, converse came to mean "TO COMMUNICATE (with)" around the
1590s, from earlier meanings of "to move about, live, DWELL" in the mid-14th century, from the
12th century Old French converser "to talk,” and from Latin conversari (see conversation).

Of course, to be in conversation is ethnically to be a convert to the nation by which that language is

ofÞcial and national, the verb convert coming from around 1300, as the Old French convertir, from
Vulgar Latin convertire, and Latin convertere "turn around, transform," from com- “together" and -
vertere "to turn" (versus). Originally, this was reference to the religious sense. The Latin word is
glossed in Old English by gecyrren, from cierran "to turn, return."

It is of the utmost importance to comprehend that this process of reÞning and altering manÕs image
into a commodity with valuable consideration is representative of the destruction of manÕs Life and
Law under God, and is the Þgurative re-creation of man into and under the system of mammon in
only a legal (dead) id-entity of existence. It is a simulation of hell. This conversion process alters and
molds the mind to be governable, making boys grow up with “public-mindedness” and with no
knowledge of any other way. OneÕs religious teachings or lack thereof, being a source of and under
legal state sanction, never teach one the origins of Natural Law. Man becomes the collateral for the
money he thus spends. His life revolves solely around the use of money, for his debt can never be
paid, try as he may. His in-person-nation in surname and signature creates the money, because the
money is only a representation of the future labor and tax potential of the bonded man in surety
through personhood. Everything he purchases (conquers) with money in the name of the state
therefore does not belong to him, for he is merely the agentic user and renter of things purchased
with anotherÕs patented property and in anotherÕs name.

This is the very nature of our relationship to mammon. And this is the very destruction of manÕs
Natural bond to Jehovah. For this is how manÕs Self is purchased (conquered) at birth through
information and conversation. We are convicted at birth into a life of legal crime, civilly licensed
and morally deprived.

The legal law is created in very much the same way and with the same intent, without the
substance but with the intent of the destruction of the Laws of God and Its Nature. This historical
alteration of money into the mere form of substance (a false mirror image of the Real) literally
made money the foundational root of all evil (artiÞce), which is the virtual wellspring of unlimited
usury. Not ironically, our entire system of legal law and commerce is built in the same way and
upon the same artiÞcial foundation; on the interest (tax) of form without substance.

!938
So what does this make you?

This legal artiÞciality of patriotic personhood in a state of continuous usury is what the Bible,
though not the corporate church doctrines, deÞnes as a sinner. For the act of committing to
personhood is in fact adultery, as a commercial attachment to legal entities (idols) of only a
representational form (image) in abandonment of all substance (of Jehovah).

ADULTERY - noun - [Latin adulterium. See Adulterate.] 1. Violation of the marriage bed; a
crime, or a civil injury, which introduces, or may introduce, into a family, a spurious
offspring… In common usage, adultery means the unfaithfulness of any married person to
the marriage bed... 2. IN A SCRIPTURAL SENSE, ALL MANNER OF LEWDNESS OR
UNCHASTITY, as in the seventh commandment. 3. In scripture, IDOLATRY, or APOSTASY
FROM THE TRUE GOD. Jeremiah 3:8. 4. In old laws, the Þne and penalty imposed for the
offense of adultery. 5. In ecclesiastical affairs, the intrusion of a person into a bishopric, during
the life of the bishop. 6. AMONG ANCIENT NATURALISTS, THE GRAFTING OF TREES
WAS CALLED ADULTERY BEING CONSIDERED AS AN UNNATURAL UNION.
(Webs1828)

ADULTERATE - verb transitive - [Latin adultero, from adulter, MIXED, or an adulterer; ad and
alter, other.] To corrupt, debase, or MAKE IMPURE BY AN ADMIXTURE of baser materials;
as, to adulterate liquors, or the coin of a country. - verb intransitive - To commit adultery. -
adjective - TAINTED with adultery; DEBASED BY FOREIGN MIXTURE. (Webs1828)

APOSTASY (2) - noun - [Gr. a defection, to depart.] 1. An abandonment of what one has
professed; a total desertion, or departure from one's faith or religion. 2. The desertion from a
party to which one has adhered. 3. Among physicians, the throwing off of exfoliated or
fractured bone, or the various SOLUTION OF DISEASE. 4. An abscess. (Webs1828)

IDOLATRY - noun - [Latin idololatria. Gr. idol, and to worship or serve.] 1. The worship of
idols, images, or ANY THING MADE BY HANDS, OR WHICH IS NOT GOD. Idolatry is of
two kinds; the worship of images, statues, pictures, etc., made by hands; and the worship of
the heavenly bodies, the sun, moon and stars, or of DEMONS, ANGELS, MEN and
ANIMALS. 2. Excessive ATTACHMENT or veneration FOR ANY THING, or that which
borders on ADORATION. (Webs1828)

IDOLATER - noun - [Latin idololatra. See Idolatry.] 1. A worshiper of idols; one who pays
divine honors to images, statues, or REPRESENTATIONS of any thing made by hands; one
who worships as a deity that which is not God; A PAGAN. 2. AN ADORER; A GREAT
ADMIRER. (Webs1828)

IDOL - noun - [Latin idolum; Gr. FORM or to see.] 1. An IMAGE, FORM OR

REPRESENTATION, USUALLY OF A MAN or other animal, consecrated as an object of
worship; a pagan deity. Idols are usually statues or images, carved out of wood or stone, or
formed of metals, particularly silver or gold. THE GODS OF THE NATIONS ARE IDOLS.
Psalms 96:5. 2. An image. Nor ever idol seemed so much alive. 3. A PERSON LOVED AND
HONORED TO ADORATION. The prince was the idol of the people. 4. Any thing on
which we SET our affections; that to which we indulge an excessive and SINFUL
ATTACHMENT. Little children, keep yourselves from idols. 1 John 5:1. An idol is ANY
THING WHICH USURPS THE PLACE OF GOD IN THE HEARTS OF HIS RATIONAL
CREATURES. 5. A REPRESENTATION… (Webs1828)

INDULGE - verb transitive - indulj'. [Latin indulgeo; tolero.] 1. TO PERMIT TO BE OR TO

CONTINUE; TO SUFFER; NOT TO RESTRAIN OR OPPOSE; as, to indulge sloth; to indulge
the passions; to indulge pride, selÞshness or inclinations. 2. To gratify, NEGATIVELY; NOT
TO CHECK OR RESTRAIN THE WILL, appetite or desire; as, to indulge children in
amusements. 3. To gratify, POSITIVELY; TO GRANT SOMETHING NOT OF RIGHT, but

!939
 as a favor; to grant in compliance with wishes or desire. Yet, a moment, one dim ray of light.
Indulge, dread Chaos and eternal Night! 4. In general, to gratify; to favor; to humor; TO
YIELD TO THE WISHES OF; TO WITHHOLD RESTRAINT FROM. It is remarked by
Johnson, that if the matter of indulgence is a single thing, it has with before it; if it is a habit, it
has in. He indulged himself with a glass of wine; he indulges himself in sloth or intemperance.
- verb transitive - indulj'. TO PERMIT TO ENJOY OR PRACTICE; OR TO YIELD TO THE
ENJOYMENT OR PRACTICE OF, WITHOUT RESTRAINT OR CONTROL; AS, TO
INDULGE IN SIN, or in sensual pleasure. This form of expression is elliptical, a pronoun
being omitted; as, to indulge myself or himself. MOST MEN ARE MORE WILLING TO
INDULGE IN EASY VICES, THAN TO PRACTICE LABORIOUS VIRTUES. 1. To yield; TO
COMPLY; TO BE FAVORABLE…. (Webs1828)

INDULGENCE, INDULGENCY - noun - FREE PERMISSION to the appetites, humor,

desires, passions or will to act or operate; FORBEARANCE OF RESTRAINT OR
CONTROL. How many children are ruined by indulgence! Indulgence is not kindness or
tenderness, but it may be the effect of one or the other, or of negligence. 1. GratiÞcation; as
the indulgence of lust or of appetite. 2. Favor granted; liberality; gratiÞcation. If all these
gracious indulgencies are without effect on us, we must perish in our folly. 3. IN THE
ROMISH CHURCH, REMISSION OF THE PUNISHMENT DUE TO SINS, GRANTED BY
THE POPE OR CHURCH, and supposed to save the sinner from purgatory; ABSOLUTION
FROM THE CENSURES OF THE CHURCH AND FROM ALL TRANSGRESSIONS.
(Webs1828)

—=—

The church indulges sin, accepting payments in mammon for its supposed forbearance of
punishment in the stead of God. Does that sound spiritual to you? Or is it now clear that the church
is only a legal creation of man to justify and license permissive sin?

How can the personage of the ßattering title of the pope and bishopric of the corporation of the
Catholic or other church remiss anything that is only of the Nature of Jehovah? It cannot, for God
does not respect any such person or title, even an ecclesiastical one. We can pretend, but as the
above scripture tells us, ‘And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to
every man's work…’ But no thing of this world can replace the Father in Heaven, the Creator of and
as Creation. For they are only the titles of usurpers, which use word magic and trickery to make
men love (believe in) the empty form of political and societal statuses instead of (anti) God’s True
Nature of substance. Godfathers…

What is the apostasy of adultery if not personhood, citizenship; the mask of a Þctional commercial
undertaking in the voluntary understanding and consent of legal Þction and law as it stands
directly opposed to God’s Nature?

How does a man comprehend his idolatry if his adultery is such that he was tricked into it at birth
by both the church and state, as an infant of such tender age that under no circumstance can he be
held liable for that idolatrous legal surname and representation in good faith? And when he turns
into an adult (becomes legally adulterated), is it any surprise that he continues to indulge in artiÞce
after being educated to do so and told he cannot buy, work, or sell if he does not take and keep that
mark of false id-entity by both church and state? Nothing has changed in that pagan Roman system
in combination (conspiracy and confederation) of church and state. Remember, while the action of
corporate religions and governments to adulterate in apostasy is a verb, the Þctional persona
created by that adulteration is a noun (name of person), as an idolater. We go from legal infants to
legal adults, now don’t we? The only difference is consent. In personhood, sadly, even the most
devoutly titled “Christians” are acting as Romanized pagans despite their inner moral beliefs. For it
is their status in persona that betrays them to God. This is the power of the magi word-smiths in
their trickery and rule by deception.

!940
 —=—

“Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine

enemies: for they are ever with me.”
—Psalms 119: 98, KJB


—=—

While a man is considered (by God) only by his priceless substance as the sole (soul) Creation of
Jehovah, a person is to God only an insulting idol as a false being and low existence in some
statistical form of man without obedience to God or Natural Law. Person-hood as adultery is a
direct violation of the scriptural commandments; and not just the Bible’s, but of all ancient wisdom
and teachings. Thus, persons are not considered or respected by God, as the scriptures instruct time
and time again. As to this artiÞce that the Bible calls out as sin, the church relishes in its own corp-
orate artiÞce (personhood) and monetary collections to honor its place in mammon. The church
promotes only artiÞce. The church literally promotes by indulgence (license) Biblical sin as per-
missive adultery and idol worship, as it instructs to obey the legalized “Law of the Land” and to
respect government’s legal existence and authority in artiÞcial personhood. The church invests its
proÞts and collects the interest (usury). And the state is happy to promote these corporate religions
as well, for they feed one another their members and both hold man’s (their own) law above God’s.

So what is the difference between adultery and fornication, and why have these two concepts been
mixed together as if they are the same terminology?

The etymology of the word adultery comes from the Old French avoutrie, aoulterie, a noun of
condition from avoutre/aoutre, and from the Latin adulterare "to corrupt," meaning, “debauch;
FALSIFY, debase.” The term adulterate is used correctly when DESCRIBING A LIE OR A
CORRUPTION OF SOMETHING THAT WAS PURE. Broadly speaking, an act of Adultery is an
act that makes purity into impurity.

All ancient religions concur on this point. Only man’s recreation of false doctrines in incorporation
obfuscates the intent of most religions.

—=—

"Three evil deeds [that create suffering] 


depending upon the body are: 

killing, stealing, and committing adultery."



—Buddha, from The Practice of Dhyâna

—=—

"Have nought to do with adultery; 


for it is a foul thing and an evil way."



—Mohammed, from the Qu'ran, Sura XVII, The Night Journey, Mecca

—=—

No Natural religion will ever be created that promotes good without demonizing evil. For no
parable may be told about good without exposing its opposite. No religion, barring the satanist
(adversarial) cults and entries within the masonic Talmud, will ever promote Þction over Reality or

!941
legality over the self-evident Natural Law. And no legal system will ever promote God over its own
self-proclaimed gods (creators/magistrates) in idolatry, for the legal artiÞce serves only the
purpose of adulteration of all men into its Þctional ways. Only when good is redeÞned as evil may
man’s individual religious (moral) disposition be corrupted by such mis-transliterations of
corporations that require his membership and money.

And so like the substance of Real gold replaced with merely the form of the image of paper money,
man too relinquishes his very substance in order to operate in a formal, commercial, Godless
personhood - a membership to the constituted debtorÕs hell. He carries and thus bears that Þctional
persona (status) of and under mammon, making him the undertaker of a usurious disposition. In
other words, we all become a commercial venture for the state as we continuously act artiÞcially
within its person (property/status) and under its easements. Our lives are supposed to be set upon
a mission from God, but our actions are usurped and redirected by the legal gods into a monetary
ad-venture and under-taking for those state magistrates (idolatrous gods)!

ADVENTURER - One who undertakes uncertain or hazardous actions or enterprises. It is

also used to denote ONE WHO SEEKS TO ADVANCE HIS OWN INTERESTS BY
UNSCRUPULOUS DESIGNS ON THE CREDULITY OF OTHERS. It has been held that to
impute that a person is an adventurer is a libel. (Black4)

ADVENTITIUS - Latin. Fortuitous; incidental; unusual source. Adventilia bona are goods
which fall to a man OTHERWISE THAN BY INHERITANCE. Adventitia dos is a dowry or
portion given by some friend OTHER THAN THE PARENT. (Black4)

ADVENTITIOUS - That which comes incidentally, fortuitously, or out of the regular course.
"Adventitious value" OF LANDS… (Black4)

ADVENTURA - An adventure. Flotson, jetson, and lagon are styled adventurae maris,
(adventures of the sea.) (Black4)

AD - Latin. At; by; for; near; on account of; to; until; upon; with relation to or concerning.
(Black4)

VENTURE - verb - To take (the) chances. (Black4)

VENTURE - noun - An UNDERTAKING attended with RISK, especially one aiming at

MAKING MONEY; business speculation. (Black4)

CHANCE - Absence of explainable or controllable causation; ACCIDENT; fortuity;

HAZARD; result or issue of uncertain and unknown conditions or forces; risk; unexpected,
unforeseen, or unintended consequence of an act. THE OPPOSITE OF INTENTION,
DESIGN, OR CONTRIVANCE. But it has been held that there is a wide difference between
chance and accident. (Black4)

CHANCE BARGAIN - The entering into a contract FOR BETTER OR WORSE,

ACCOMPANIED BY THE TAKING OF CHANCES as to the true facts and situation of the
thing or article bargained about. (Black4)

CHANCELLOR - In American law, this is the name given in some states to THE JUDGE (or
the presiding judge) of a court of chancery. (Black4)

CHANCER - TO ADJUST according to PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY, as would be done by a

court of chancery. The practice arose in parts of New England when the courts, without
equity jurisdiction, were compelled to act upon equitable principles. (Black4)

CHANCERY - Equity; equitable jurisdiction; A COURT OF EQUITY; the system of

jurisprudence ADMINISTERED in courts of equity. (Black4)

!942
 SHIP - As a termination, denotes STATE OR OFFICE; as in lordship. [See Shape.] (Webs1828)

SHIP - noun - [Latin scapha; from the root of SHAPE.] In a general sense, a vessel or building
of a peculiar structure, ADAPTED TO NAVIGATION, or ßoating on water by means of sails.
In an appropriate sense, a building of a structure or form Þtted for navigation… Ships are of
various sizes and are for various uses; most of them however fall under the denomination of
ships of war and merchant's ships. - verb transitive - 1. To put on board of a SHIP OR
VESSEL OF ANY KIND; as, to ship goods at Liverpool for New York. 2. To transport in a
ship; to convey by water. The sun shall no sooner the mountains touch, But we will ship him
hence. 3. TO RECEIVE INTO A SHIP OR VESSEL; as, to ship at sea. To ship the oars, to
place them in the rowlocks. To ship off, to send away by water; as, to ship off convicts.
(Webs1828)

ADVENTURE - A hazardous and striking ENTERPRISE, a bold UNDERTAKING in which

hazards are to be met and ISSUE hangs upon unforeseen events. Generally. Adventure, bill
of. In mercantile law, a writing signed by a merchant, stating that the property in goods
shipped in his name BELONGS TO ANOTHER, to the adventure or chance OF WHICH
THE PERSON SO NAMED IS TO STAND, with a covenant from the merchant to account to
him for the produce. Gross adventure. In maritime law, a loan on bottomry. So named
because the lender, in case of a loss, or expense incurred for the common safety, must
contribute to the gross or general average. Joint adventure. A commercial or maritime
enterprise undertaken by several persons jointly; a limited partnership, -not limited in the
statutory sense as to the liability of the partners, but as to its scope and duration. A special
partnership. An association of two or more persons to carry out a single business enterprise
for proÞt, for which purpose they combine their property, money, effects, skill, and
knowledge. A special COMBINATION of two or more persons, where, in some speciÞc
adventure, a proÞt is jointly sought, without any actual partnership or corporate
designation. It is ordinarily, but not necessarily, limited to a single transaction, which serves to
distinguish it from a partnership. But the business of conducting it to a successful termination
may continue for a number of years. There is no real distinction between a “joint adventure”
and what is termed a “partnership for a single transaction.” A “joint adventure,” while not
identical with a partnership, is so similar in its nature and in the relations created thereby that
the rights of the parties as between themselves are governed practically by the same rules
that govern partnerships. Marine Insurance. A very usual word in policies of marine
insurance, and everywhere used as synonymous, or nearly so, with "perils." It is often used by
the writers to describe the ENTERPRISE OR VOYAGE as a "marine adventure" insured
against. Mercantile Law. Sending goods abroad under charge of a supercargo or other
AGENT, at the risk of the sender, to be disposed of TO THE BEST ADVANTAGE FOR THE
BENEFIT OF THE OWNERS. The goods themselves so sent. (Black4)

—=—

Attaching the terminating sufÞx (-ship) upon any word creates a Þctional state of being in that
thing, setting the undertaker of that simulated ship on a commercial adventure upon the sea of
commerce. Citizen-ship is the state of being in the public ofÞce and adventure of a US citizen. One
simply does not and cannot claim at some time to be and at other times not to be in a state of
citizen-ship. It is a false permanence of contractual being, and one that cannot be denied once
obtained and once appearance is made in that id-entity of persona. As the existence of man in
Þction, the ship (status/state of being) is always assumed to be sailing (in legal existence and
subsistence). The legal law, therefore, is also always assumed and presumed to apply to all men
acting in citizen-ships, all of the time.

To act in person is to under-take an ad-venture upon the commercial sea within the ship (person) of
another (of the nation/country). The only purpose for this undertaking upon (ad) a citizen-ship
(venture) is literally to play the life-long game of Monopoly - to land occasionally on Chance, to
make (create), collect (borrow), and spend (use commercially) money from thin air (loan/usury) in

!943
a state of manifest usury by our signature, and for Þnancial business and real estate purposes (the
game of monopolies, building houses and hotels in rent upon the titled land of another under
usufruct). Ad-venture is a word used almost exclusively in in-SUR-ance policies, to insure the SUR-
name (as government property) against risk of loss in voyage, theft, hazard, peril, danger, chance,
wager, etc., while operating that commercial vessel of the United States. Government takes no
chances with its own property (persons) any more than a rental car company might, requiring
insurance to be procured on all of its registered property, including what we are led to believe is
our own home, car, and other tenements. We insure (ensure) that which is under the surname, for
all that is registered as property under that admixture of the christian and sur names belongs only
to that last (higher in status) name, not the man that merely uses it under fee and rent in tenancy.

—=—

“He who betrays his country is like the insane sailor who bores a hole
in THE SHIP WHICH CARRIES HIM.”
—QUI MOLITUR INSIDIAS IN PATRIAM ID FACIT QUOD INSANUS NAUTA PERFORANS NAVEM IN QUA VEHITUR. 3 Inst. 36. (Black4)

—=—

In this regard, we are the usurious bearers or carriers (registered agents) of the commercial paper
(matrix) we call as Þctional persons. Though our ship is bound for hell, we will not abandon its
hand that feeds us, like rats being led into a delectably cheesy trap. Consequently, we are possessed
and held in a debt obligation called public personhood, like summoned demons being controlled
by magical word-spells. We allow the demon (person) to voluntarily enter our God-given vessel,
and we manifest its evil in commercial artiÞce while transacting the business called civil life. We
legally carry it wherever we go and we use (employ) its legal name (noun) in whatever we do. ItÕs
like a thin, thorny, disease-ridden blanket, offering only the illusionary warmth of legal protection.

CARRY - To BEAR, bear about, SUSTAIN, transport, remove, or convey. To have or bear
upon or about one's person, as a watch or weapon; locomotion not being essential. As
applied to insurance, means "POSSESS" or Òhold.Ó (Black4)

CARRY ARMS OR WEAPONS - To wear, bear, or carry them UPON THE PERSON or in the
clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose of USE, or for the purpose of being armed and ready
for offensive or defensive action in case of a conßict with another person. (Black4)

CARRY STOCK - To provide funds or credit for its payment for the period agreed upon
from the date of purchase. (Black4)

CARRY ON TRADE OR BUSINESS - To conduct avocation or business as A

CONTINUOUS OPERATION OR PERMANENT OCCUPATION. The repetition of acts
may be sufÞcient. TO HOLD ONE'S SELF OUT TO OTHERS AS ENGAGED in the selling
of goods or services. (Black4)

AVOCAT - French. An advocate; a barrister. (Black4)

AVOCATION - A calling away, a diversion, suggesting idea of smaller affairs of life, or

occasional employments as distinguished from one's ordinary or principal occupation; a
SUBORDINATE or occasional occupation. (Black4)

ADVOCATOR - In old practice, one who called on or vouched another TO WARRANT A

TITLE; a voucher. Advocatus; the person called on, or vouched; a vouchee. (Black4)

APOLOGIST - noun - [See Apology.] One who makes an apology; one who speaks or writes
in defense of another. (Webs1828)

!944
APOLOGY - noun - [Gr. DISCOURSE.] AN EXCUSE; something said or written in defense
or extenuation of what appears to others wrong, or unjustiÞable; or of what may be liable to
disapprobation. It may be an extenuation of what is not perfectly justiÞable, or a vindication
of what is or may be disapproved, but which the apologist deems to be right. A man makes
an apology for not fulÞlling an engagement, OR FOR PUBLISHING A PAMPHLET. An
apology then is a reason or reasons assigned for what is wrong or may appear to be wrong,
and it may be either AN EXTENUATION OR A JUSTIFICATION of something that is or
may be censured, by those who are not acquainted with the reasons. (Webs1828)

DISCOURSE - (See index; deÞned in Chapter 1) (Webs1828)

DIS - a preÞx or inseparable preposition, from the Latin, whence Fr. Des, Sp. dis and de may in
some instances be the same word contracted. Dis denotes SEPARATION, A PARTING
FROM; hence it has the force of A PRIVATIVE AND NEGATIVE, as in disarm, disoblige,
disagree. In some cases, it still signiÞes separation, as in distribute, disconnect. (Webs1828)

COURSE - noun - 1. In its general sense, a passing; a moving, or motion forward, in a direct or
curving line; applicable to any body or substance, solid or ßuid. Applied to animals, a
running, or walking; a race; a career; a passing, or passage, with any degree of swiftness
indeÞnitely. Applied to ßuids, a ßowing, as in a stream in any direction; as a straight course or
winding course. It is applied to water or other liquids, to air or wind, and to light, in the sense
of motion or passing. Applied to solid bodies, it signiÞes motion or passing; as the course of a
rolling stone; the course of a carriage; the course of the earth in its orbit. Applied to
navigation, it signiÞes a passing or motion ON WATER, or in balloons in air; A VOYAGE. 2.
The direction of motion; line of advancing; point of compass, in which motion is directed;
as, what course shall the pilot steer? In technical language, the angel contained between the
nearest meridian and that point of compass on which a ship sails in any direction. 3. Ground
on which a race is run. 4. A passing or process; the progress of any thing; as the course of an
argument, or of a debate; a course of thought or reßexion. 5. ORDER OF PROCEEDING OR
OF PASSING FROM AN ANCESTOR TO AN HEIR; AS THE COURSE OF DESCENT IN
INHERITANCE. 6. Order; turn; CLASS; SUCCESSION OF ONE TO ANOTHER IN
OFFICE, OR DUTY. The chief FATHERS of every course. 1 Chronicles 27:1. Solomon
appointed the courses of the priests. 2 Chronicles 8:14. 7. Stated and orderly method of
proceeding; usual manner. He obtained redress in due course of law. Leave nature to her
course. 8. Series of successive and methodical procedure; a train of acts, or applications; as a
course of medicine administered. 9. A methodical series, applied to the ARTS or sciences; A
SYSTEMIZED ORDER OF PRINCIPLES IN ARTS or sciences, for illustration of
instruction. We say, the author has completed a course of principles or of lectures in
philosophy. Also, the order pursued by a student; as, he has completed a course of studies in
law or physics. 10. Manner of PROCEEDING; WAY OF LIFE OR CONDUCT; deportment;
series of actions. That I might Þnish my course with joy. Acts 20:24. THEIR COURSE IS EVIL.
Jeremiah 23:10. 11. Line of conduct; manner of proceeding; as, we know not what course to
pursue. 12. Natural bent; propensity; uncontrolled will. Let not a perverse child take his own
course. 13. Tilt; act of running in the lists. 14. Orderly structure; SYSTEM. THE TONGUE
SETTETH ON FIRE THE COURSE OF NATURE. James 3:6. 15. Any regular series… 17.
Regularity; order; regular succession; as, let the classes follow in course. 18. EMPTY FORM;
as, compliments are often WORDS OF COURSE. Of course by consequence; in regular or
natural order; in the common manner of proceeding; without special direction or provision.
This effect will follow of course. If the defendant resides not in the state, the cause is
continued of course. (Webs1828)

DUE COURSE OF LAW - This phrase is synonymous with "due process of law," or "the law
of the land," and the general deÞnition thereof is "LAW IN ITS REGULAR COURSE OF
ADMINISTRATION THROUGH COURTS OF JUSTICE;" and, while not always necessarily
conÞned to judicial proceedings, yet these words have such a signiÞcation, when used to

!945
 designate the kind of an eviction, or ouster, from real estate by which a party is dispossessed,
as to preclude thereunder proof of a constructive eviction resulting from the purchase of a
PARAMOUNT TITLE when hostilely asserted by the party holding it. (Black4)

OF RIGHT - As a matter OF COURSE. (Black4)

OF COURSE - As a matter of RIGHT. Any action or step taken in the course of judicial
proceedings which will be allowed by the court upon mere application, without any inquiry
or contest, or which may be effectually taken without even applying to the court for leave.
(Black4)

OF GRACE - This phrase had its origin in an age when kings dispensed their royal favors at
the hands of chancellors, but has no rightful place in American jurisprudence. A term
applied to ANY PERMISSION OR LICENSE granted to a party in the course of a judicial
proceeding which is not claimable as a matter of course or of right, but is ALLOWED BY
THE FAVOR OR INDULGENCE OF THE COURT. (Black4)

OF THE BLOOD - A technical legal phrase meaning TO BE DESCENDED FROM THE

PERSON referred to OR FROM THE SAME COMMON STOCK AND FROM A COMMON
ANCESTOR. (Black4)

OF - A term denoting THAT FROM WHICH ANYTHING PROCEEDS; indicating ORIGIN,

SOURCE, DESCENT, and the like; as, he is of a race of kings; he is of noble blood.
Associated with or connected with, usually in some causal RELATION, efÞcient, material,
formal, or Þnal. The word has been held equivalent to after, at, or BELONGING TO, IN
POSSESSION OF, MANUFACTURED BY, by, RESIDING AT, FROM, (and) IN. (Black4)

—=—

When we hear the word of, as in citizen OF the United States, it describes our origin, as those born
of (in) the nation (as goyim) and belonging to it via legal status. And so the word independence,
since it is granted by the United States, really means of dependence — a state of being that is
dependent on the master. It is only formal independence, not actual, substantive Reality. Denizen-
ship… A rat in a cage has political independence too within its master’s borders!

Likewise, when a judge or other attorney or ofÞcer of the court and state uses the term Òof course,Ó
we cannot consider this in our vulgar tongue. For the authoritarian Þgure is claiming a thing of
right, and that the thing done of course was done in the course (road) of de jure (legitimate) purpose
in Law, while the whole time acting in the undertaking of commercial citizenship or under legal
title and license to commit crime with permission of the state.

Is the law of the United States supreme? OF COURSE it is, but only to its voluntarist slaves
(subjects) in servitude… God’s (Nature’s) Law, however, is always Highest. Man must abandon
God and under-take a public ofÞce in ad-venture for legal law to become artiÞcially supreme; a dis-
course away from God dependent solely upon the words that govern our ad-venture. The law is
only supreme over those that claim to be of (belonging to) the creator of that law.

As public citizens, our legal course is set for us as regulatory restrictions and political liberties upon
persons. These are prescribed, predeÞned, constituted, franchised, enforced, instilled, professed,
propagandized, patronized, and personiÞed into our very legal existence. Our beliefs bend to the
will of government’s person and in its usage within its legal matrix of word-magic, and those that
don’t bend get bent into shape by force and imprisonment or through other means and exactions
(extortions). Government is in the business of dis-course, of taking each man away from his
Natural ways and means; as a purposeful, legal separation away from his God-granted gift, course
(negative Right), and the ability to assert his Highest duty to his fellow man under that Natural
Law.

!946
We may only carry the laden (burden) of the state when we act the part of its citizen-ships in
commerce. These legal codes and terms of art are like the cargo that a ship bears or carries upon the
water. And it is our proudness of the artiÞce of those collected and carried paper possessions of low
title in usufruct that blinds us to the Truth… that there is no “title,” no “spoon,” no “name,” and no
actual “property.” Ships may carry, but their voyage and possession is only ever a temporary ad-
venture and undertaking of their principal master.

—=—

“Though the LORD be high,


yet hath he respect unto the lowly:

but the proud he knoweth afar off.”
—Psalms 138: 6, KJB

—=—

Those who carry titles upon their false surnames of the state are the proud, the arrogant; as those
who have knowledge of Þction of the tree of knowledge (artiÞcial concepts) but none of the Reality
of Life under God and Nature. The lowly are those who are humbled by God’s Nature, the ignoble,
who have humility and take upon them no station, condition, title, nor the wealth that those
artiÞces cause of course. The lower in rank the higher in esteem under God; the less in artiÞce the
more in God’s Nature.

But even the rank of citizenship is a title of the lowest nobility. For when one is subject to a king, to
a sovereignty other than Jehovah and Its Supreme Laws, one is not ignoble.

Even the act of carrying the foundling cargo that is our own personiÞed children is presumed by
law to be an avocation, for the cargo (child) is registered state property under the dis-course of that
certiÞed birth and abandonment process. Ad-venturers need permission and license for such
under-takings to both act in and transport commercial cargo (children) in state agency (DMV)
registered vehicles operated by the vessels (public persons) known as citizen-ships. And the
Department of Motor Vehicles requires residential commercial adventurers (drivers) to have auto
insurance on government’s person and registered property, and of course vehicle registration for
purposes of identiÞcation and commercial licensing (permission to drive in a continuous, purely
commercial capacity under the family car and other “doctrines” as a US public, resident foreigner).
For the vehicle belongs only to the legal person, and the legal person belongs only to the state. The
man only bears that status, he does not hold it as private property, for it is a public persona. And so
the state requires usury and insurance on anyone using its proprietary surname and numbers
(marks) to cover the risk upon its registered property while being operated under the “freedom” of
that commercial name (franchise).

CARGO - In mercantile law. THE LOAD OR LADING OF A VESSEL; goods and

merchandise put on board a ship to be CARRIED to a certain port. The LADING or freight
of a SHIP; the goods, merchandise, or WHATEVER is conveyed in a ship or other merchant
vessel. A cargo is the loading of a ship or other vessel, the bulk of which is to be ascertained
from the CAPACITY of the ship or vessel. The word embraces all that the vessel is
CAPABLE of CARRYING. The term may be applied in such a sense as to include
PASSENGERS, as well as freight, but in a technical sense it designates goods only. (Black2)

GOODS AND CHATTELS - This term is applied to ALL PERSONAL PROPERTY that is not
real estate. (Black2)

CHATTEL - An ARTICLE of personal property; any species of property NOT

AMOUNTING TO A FREEHOLD OR FEE IN LAND. The name given to things which in
law are deemed personal property. Chattels are divided into chattels real and chattels

!947
 personal; chattels real being INTERESTS IN LAND which devolve after the manner of
PERSONAL estate, as leaseholds. AS OPPOSED TO FREEHOLDS, THEY ARE
REGARDED AS PERSONAL ESTATE. But, as being interests in real estate, they are called
“chattels real,” TO DISTINGUISH THEM FROM MOVABLES. (Black2)

PERSONAL PROPERTY - The BELONGINGS OF AN INDIVIDUAL, excluding any real

estate property or other buildings. Generally includes tangible and intangible ASSETS OF
AN INDIVIDUAL. (Black2)

INDIVIDUAL - As a noun, this term denotes a SINGLE PERSON as distinguished from a

group or class, and also, very commonly, a PRIVATE OR NATURAL PERSON as
distinguished from a partnership, corporation, or association; but it is said that this
restrictive signiÞcation is not necessarily inherent in the word, and that it may, in proper
cases, include artiÞcial persons. As an adjective, "individual" means PERTAINING OR
BELONGING TO, OR CHARACTERISTIC OF, ONE SINGLE PERSON, either in
opposition to a Þrm, association, or corporation, OR CONSIDERED IN HIS RELATION
THERETO. (Black2)

NATURAL PERSON - A HUMAN BEING, NATURALLY BORN, versus a LEGALLY

GENERATED juridical person. (Black2)

JURIDICAL PERSON - Entity, as a Þrm, that is NOT a single natural person, as a human
being, authorized by law with duties and rights, recognized as a legal authority having a
distinct identity, A LEGAL PERSONALITY. Also known as ARTIFICIAL PERSON, juridical
entity, juristic person, or legal person. Also refer to BODY CORPORATE. (Black2)

ARTIFICIAL PERSON - A NONHUMAN ENTITY that is CREATED BY LAW and is legally

different owning its own rights and duties. AKA juristic person and legal person. Refer to
body corporate. (Black2)
—=—

One is only required to insure and stand in surety to what is not oneÕs own. Home, car, natural and
artiÞcial person (franchise)… Remember, a human being is not a man, and neither is a legally created
natural person. A human is not a Creation of God, and is not of Nature. Human is animal, as that
which is considered without soul, without blood. That which is hu-man is what is of (belongs to)
man.

And so here is a trick question, after all we have learned so far. Does two or more ÒpersonsÓ equal a
Òpeople?Ó

No, absolutely not! Men are people, persons are property. Persons cannot exist without Þrst there
being a man to agenticly puppet-master it upon its legal ad-venture. ÒThe PeopleÓ create persons as
and through their own corporations. ÒThe PeopleÓ (constituted States) will always be the god
(creators and controllers) of persons.

—=—

“The plural of person is PERSONS, NOT PEOPLE…”



ÑOran's Dictionary of the Law, West Group 1999, from its deÞnition of ÔpersonÕ

—=—

We must know that all requirements of the legal sphere are proprietary, meaning they are only
attached to the object of the right. A persona may be attached to just about anything we can
imagine, as long as at some point there is a mask of id-entity attached to what is Real so that it may

!948
have some force behind that artiÞcial life and effect upon Reality and over other Þctional persons,
places, and things. Legal rights are never, therefore, attached directly to man or to the private
property of a man, only to the individual or juridical, legal, or body corporate (principal) person for
which man represents. The man is subject to the object when he operates under that Þctional name
in persona. Political rights are attached only to the political (Þctional) legal person, not the man. A
man holds only those so-called ÒGod-given rightsÓ as are his negative duties under God. Legal
rights are the positively enforced property of government, bestowed and enforced only upon
property (persons) of government. If you claim a positively (Þctionally) created right, you may do
so only while acting in surety to government property, as some formality of personhood. The right
to carry property insurance on the person and its personal property is a requirement of law for use
of that government property, while other government properties such as Federal Reserve and other
forms of monetary notes are generally, publicly insured automatically (e.g., FDIC). But it is most
important here to grasp that, since all forms of government script in money form are insured
creations of government, they are all property of government, and can be conÞscated at any time
from the ÒpersonÓ so holding them in use only. Under God, in Nature, insurance simply does not
Exist, for artiÞcial things do not Truly Exist. Insurance is only based on the artiÞce of money,
nothing else.

Remember, when acting in the person (self) of another, at no time does it matter what you believe
should be law or moral right, only what the law presumes and proscribes upon the person you are
in use of. When you join a club do you not follow the rules of the club, which prescribes the law
(rules) of its member-ships for which you use the numbered identiÞcation of to acquire beneÞts? Is
not the ship carrying the lading (load) of all the rules and obligations of the member? Is not the
member-ship in contract what is used to force the man to act under the rules of the ship? Do you
not sail upon their ship (title and number) while acting as merely a digital member of their
commercial enterprise? Are you not bound then to their club rules? Are you not merely an
ÒindividualÓ member (person), considered wholly as one body politic of members in member-ship?
And do their laws, rules, customs, and beliefs not trump your own opinions under contract within
that clubÕs jurisdiction?


The only other questions you should consider, are these: Can you not quit that member-ship
anytime by ending the contract if you donÕt like it, its rules, or its rulers? Do you think that
government citizen-ship is really any different? Do you really believe and use the lame excuse that
you cannot quit claiming and volunteering to be something you are not?

MEMBER - noun - [Latin membrum.]É 2. A part of a DISCOURSE, or of a period or

SENTENCE; a clause; a part of a VERSE. Harmony in poetry is produced by a proportion
between the members of the same verse, or between the members of different verses. 3. In
architecture, a subordinate part of a building, as a frieze or cornice; sometimes a molding. 4.
AN INDIVIDUAL OF A COMMUNITY OR SOCIETY. EVERY CITIZEN IS A MEMBER OF
THE STATE OR BODY POLITIC. So the INDIVIDUALS of a club, a CORPORATION or
CONFEDERACY, are called its MEMBERS. Students of an academy or college are its
members. Professed christians are called MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH. 5. THE
APPETITES AND PASSIONS, CONSIDERED AS TEMPTING TO SIN. Romans 7:5.
Colossians 3:5. (Webs1828)

CLAUSE - noun - s as z. Literally, a close, or INCLOSURE. Hence, that which is INCLUDED,

OR CONTAINED, WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITS. 1. In language or grammar, a member of a
period or sentence; a subdivision of a sentence, in which the words are inseparably connected
with each other in sense, and cannot, with propriety, be separated by a point; as, there is
reason to think that he afterwards rose to favor, and obtained several honors civil and military.
In this sentence are two clauses. 2. An ARTICLE in a CONTRACT or other WRITING; a
distinct part of a contract, will, agreement, CHARTER, commission, or other writing; a
distinct stipulation, condition, proviso, GRANT, COVENANT, etc. (Webs1828)

INCLUDED - participle passive - Contained; COMPREHENDED. (Webs1828)

!949
 INCLUDE - verb intransitive - [Latin includo; in and cludo, TO SHUT UP.] 1. TO CONFINE
WITHIN; TO HOLD; TO CONTAIN; as, the shell of a nut includes the kernel; a pearl is
included in a shell. [But in these senses we more commonly use INCLOSE.] 2. To comprise; to
comprehend; to contain. The history of England necessarily includes a portion of that of
France. The word DUTY, includes WHAT WE OWE TO GOD, TO OUR FELLOW MEN,
AND TO OURSELVES; IT INCLUDES ALSO A TAX PAYABLE TO THE GOVERNMENT.
(Webs1828)

CLOSE - noun - A PORTION OF LAND, as a Þeld, inclosed, as by a hedge, fence, or other

visible inclosure. The interest of a PERSON in any particular piece of ground, whether
actually inclosed or not. The noun "close," in its LEGAL SENSE, imports a portion of land
inclosed, BUT NOT NECESSARILY INCLOSED BY ACTUAL OR VISIBLE BARRIERS.
THE INVISIBLE, IDEAL BOUNDARY, FOUNDED ON LIMIT OF TITLE, WHICH
SURROUNDS EVERY MAN'S LAND, CONSTITUTES IT HIS CLOSE, irrespective of
walls, fences, ditches, or the like. In practice. The word means termination; winding up.
Thus the close of the pleadings is where the pleadings are Þnished, i.e., when ISSUE has been
JOINED. - adjective - In practice. Closed or SEALED UP. A term applied to writs and
LETTERS, as distinguished from those that are open or PATENT. (Black2)

CLOSE AND OPEN - A "close" corporation is one in which the directors and ofÞcers have the
power to Þll vacancies in their own number, without allowing to the general body of
stockholders any choice or vote in their election. An "open" corporation is one in which all
the members or corporators have a vote in the election of the directors and other ofÞcers.
(Black2)

OPEN CONTRACT - This is a contract the terms of which DO NOT DESCRIBE THE
ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES INVOLVED, with clauses or
provisions that can be MODIFIED WITHOUT MUTUAL CONSENT (usually by the
vendor). (Black2)

CORPORATOR - A MEMBER of a corporation aggregate. (Black2)

AGGREGATE - Composed of SEVERAL; consisting of MANY PERSONS UNITED

TOGETHER. (Black2)

CORPORATION - AN ARTIFICIAL PERSON OR LEGAL ENTITY CREATED BY OR

UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE LAWS OF A STATE OR NATION, composed, in some
rare instances, OF A SINGLE PERSON AND HIS SUCCESSORS, being the incumbents of a
particular ofÞce, but ordinarily consisting of AN ASSOCIATION OF NUMEROUS
INDIVIDUALS, WHO SUBSIST AS A BODY POLITIC under a special DENOMINATION,
which is regarded IN LAW as having a PERSONALITY and EXISTENCE DISTINCT FROM
THAT OF ITS SEVERAL MEMBERS, and which is, by the same authority, VESTED WITH
THE CAPACITY OF CONTINUOUS SUCCESSION, irrespective of changes in its
membership, either in perpetuity or for a limited term of years, and of ACTING AS A UNIT
OR SINGLE INDIVIDUAL IN MATTERS RELATING TO THE COMMON PURPOSE OF
THE ASSOCIATION, within the scope of the powers and authorities conferred upon such
bodies by law. (Black2)

AGGREGATE LIABILITY - The total amount that is covered by a liability insurance policy.
It may cover a set amount for a claim and an aggregate amount for several claims of similar
nature. See insurance; liability. (Black2)

—=—

There is no state of innocence (Nature) when one is a member of what can only be called evil
(artiÞcial). When one has pledged oneself in surety to the adversary of God and Nature in legal

!950
Þction, one cannot hope to be anything but admonished thereof, abandoned of GodÕs unalienable
protection by oneÕs own accord in contract. Membership (citizenship) in any aggregate corporation
(government) of any state or church (aggregate, corporate religion) is an act against God.

While acting in mammon (commerce and usury) as an individual person of the whole aggregate
body politic of the United States, your sole opinion and will means precisely nothing. Jehovah is
made unobtainable. Just as a man apparently cannot control his own actions while possessed by a
demon or parasite (mind control), neither can a man decide or alter the laws governing a person
(name) that belongs to govern-ment (mind control) as a commercial instrument. A personÕs course
is set by the very nature and purpose of legal existence, which is to proÞt its master as a vessel in
commerce and tribute. We must only perform in person by the law of the person under sanctions of
the strict law. The law of persons is not prescribed by God and lays not in a pure negative duty. The
legal version of duty is literally to pay a tax for the ability to live and act artiÞcially in the
permanent sin (syn) of artiÞce. These are the ÒbeneÞtsÓ of legal, contractual obligation granted
within the voluntary servitude of a performance membership. This word duty is the perfect
example of how the legal version of a Natural Law word and concept is twisted into an utterly
unrecognizable functionality, generally into the formal servicing of the mammon state. Duty as a
positive contractual performance article is a required sin-tax in the legal realm, whereas a negative
Duty is a promise to God to do no harm or such extortion to others in Nature as the Highest Law.
In the legal realm, in other words, duties are a contracted sin charged for use of that which is evil
(opposed to Nature). We must pay to play in the devilÕs (attorneyÕs) playground.

Everything we purchase (conquer the Nature of) in legal person and within that system of money
(mammon), within the presumed purview of consumer protections and insurance attached to
governmentÕs legal tender and credit, is in a state of receivership. Thus, everything purchased
(conquered) comes with a certiÞcate of receipt of lading, and everything sold requires a bill of
lading, including our children.

LITERAE RECOGNITIONIS - In maritime law. A bill of lading. (Black4)

LADING - 1. Transporting vessel receiving its cargo. 2. Transportation vessel's loaded cargo
for transport. The cargo's carrier issues a receipt known as a bill of lading. (Black2)

BILL OF LADING - In common law. The written evidence of a contract for the CARRIAGE
and DELIVERY of goods sent BY SEA for a certain freight. A written memorandum, given
by the person in command of a merchant vessel, acknowledging the receipt on board the
ship of certain speciÞed goods, in good order or "apparent good order," which he
UNDERTAKES, in consideration of the payment of freight, TO DELIVER in like good order
(dangers of the sea excepted) at a designated place to the consignee therein named or to his
assigns. The term is often applied to a similar receipt and UNDERTAKING given by a
carrier of goods BY LAND. A bill of lading is AN INSTRUMENT IN WRITING, SIGNED
BY A CARRIER OR HIS AGENT, DESCRIBING THE FREIGHT SO AS TO IDENTIFY IT,
stating the NAME of the consignor, the terms of the CONTRACT for carriage, and AGREE-
ING OR DIRECTING THAT THE FREIGHT BE DELIVERED to the order or assigns of a
speciÞed person at a speciÞed place. It is receipt for goods, contract for their carriage, and is
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE OF TITLE TO GOODS. A clean bill of lading is one which
contains nothing in the margin qualifying the words in the bill of lading itself. An order bill of
lading is one in which it is stated that goods are consigned to order of any person named
therein. A straight bill of lading is one in which it is stated that goods are consigned to a
speciÞed person. A through bill of lading is one by which a railroad contracts to transport over
its own line for a certain distance carloads of merchandise or stock, there to deliver the same to
its connecting lines to be transported to the place of destination at a Þxed rate per carload for
the whole distance. (Black4)

SHORT FORM BILL OF LADING (B/L) - A bill of lading that has no conditions or terms of
carriage that are printed on the reverse. (Black2)

!951
 LONG FORM BILL OF LADING (B/L) - B/L with the terms and conditions of carriage
printed on its back. Either the older Hague rules or the more recent Hague-Visby rules govern
these terms. Conditions of carriage are deÞned as the RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITIES AND
LIABILITIES OF THE CARRIER AND THE SHIPPER. Also refer to short form bill of lading.
(Black2)

—=—

Need the author remind the reader that, while we may receive a short form certiÞed copy of our
birth certiÞcate (bill of lading) as the receipt and proof of origin, that this original birth certiÞcation
matrix is in long form?

CARRIER - One who UNDERTAKES TO TRANSPORT PERSONS OR PROPERTY FROM

PLACE TO PLACE, BY ANY MEANS OF CONVEYANCE, and with or without
compensation. (Black2)

SHIPPER - 1. The owner of goods WHO INTRUSTS THEM ON BOARD A VESSEL FOR
DELIVERY abroad, by charter-party or otherwise. 2. Also, a Dutch word, signifying THE
MASTER OF A SHIP. It is mentioned in some of the statutes; is now generally called
“skipper.” (Black2)

SKIPPER - noun - 1. The master of a small trading vessel. 2. (From skip.) A DANCER. 3. A
youngling; A YOUNG THOUGHTLESS PERSON. 4. The hornÞsh, so called. 5. The cheese
maggot. (Webs1828)

SKIP-KENNEL - noun - A LACKEY; A FOOTBOY. (Webs1828)

DANCER - noun - One who practices dancing, or is skillful in the performance. (Webs1828)

DANCING - participle present tense - Leaping and stepping to the sound of the voice or of an
instrument; moving in measured steps; frisking about. (Webs1828)

DANCE - verb intransitive - 1. Primarily, to leap or spring; hence, to leap or move with
measured steps, regulated by a tune, sung or played on a musical instrument; to leap or step
with graceful motions of the body, corresponding with the sound of the voice or an
instrument. There is a time to mourn, and a time to dance. Ecclesiastes 3:4. 2. To leap and
frisk about; to move nimbly or up and down. To dance attendance, to wait with obsequious-
ness; TO STRIVE TO PLEASE AND GAIN FAVOR BY ASSIDUOUS ATTENTIONS AND
OFFICIOUS CIVILITIES; AS, TO DANCE ATTENDANCE AT COURT. - verb transitive - To
make to dance; to move up and down, or back and forth; to dandle; as, to dance a child on the
knee. - noun - 1. In general sense, a leaping and frisking about. Appropriately, a leaping or
stepping with motions of the body adjusted to the measure of a tune, particularly by two or
more in concert. A lively brisk exercise or amusement, IN WHICH THE MOVEMENTS OF
THE PERSONS ARE REGULATED BY ART, IN FIGURE, and by the sound of instruments,
in measure. (Webs1828)

—=—

Ever seen a puppet show?

You think thatÕs really the puppet dancing?

We dance on the strings of a coded legal tune of written instruments, with predetermined steps
regulated by the legal art of the legal terms that make up the legal law of legal persons. It would of
course be ÒvulgarÓ to insist upon the literal deÞnition for dancing as the only one in existence. And
thatÕs exactly why they call us the vulgar, common mass of illiterates, as those who speak only in
low dog-Latin even as we dance on the word-strings of our puppet-masters.

!952
At no time in the Þctional commercial world is anything considered by its substance as and under
GodÕs Nature, but only as the informal name, title, mark, and number attached thereupon in
commercial consideration. This includes children, adults, groceries, dogs, cattle, and anything else
one undertakes as a purchaser or carrier of in lading, through the person-hood of citizen-ship. All
actions by public persons all of the time are considered as commercial ones, even when oneÕs
personal, inner intent is of a Duty to God. Remember that the allowed Òfreedom of religionÓ does
not include acting morally according to oneÕs belief; only the freedom to think, not to act. Member-
ship is in-deed amoral. It is permission to act according to a set of legalities that do not consider or
actively regulate morality. It is action without consciousness.

AMORAL - Lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of

something: an amoral attitude to sex. (Oxford University Press, 2015)

IMMORAL - Not conforming to accepted standards of morality: unseemly and immoral

behaviour. (Oxford University Press, 2015)

—=—

When morals are outlawed, the new and overbearing legalistic law becomes a falsely declared
morality. The laws of hell, for instance, are merely the moral laws of satan. The creator controls.

Again, citizenship (membership) is not so much immoral as it is amoral, and yet it is both of these
in combination (confederacy). For it places one into a state of purposeful and voluntary ignorance
of the moral laws and duties one has to God, to man, and to all of Nature, and is enforced at the
barrel of a gun. It causes manÕs actions to be of a source that is not morally ÒgroundedÓ and not
concerned with a moral code of conduct. And this is why it is considered as evil (as amoral), not so
much as a religious term but as an established lack of consideration for moral codes in Life and in
Nature Itself. Amorality leads to immorality as its side effect, for immorality is part of the law of
temptation as control. Both religion and government are guilty of creating false doctrines and
indulgences regarding the moral law, for one is incorporated under (subservient to) the other, and
therefore both are required (as a legal requirement and protective duty of contract) to support one
another. Yet the Bible offers no such exception so its Law any more than it suffers religionÕs
apologists. The moral law (of God) is defeated by those who believe in the legal law (of the devil),
and vice versa. The puppet cannot choose its own course, always going where its agent strings it
along.

The only difference between a puppet show and a day in the legal life of a commercial citizen-ship
is that in that later, mentally, the Þctional person (puppet) and its laws certainly seem to control the
actions of the Living man. One might think this to be the ÒnaturalÓ course of technology (art),
where eventually the artiÞcial intelligence (AI) controls the Reality of Nature and its Creatures. Of
course, thatÕs exactly what a technocrat would want the common citizenry to believeÉ that
evolution would change Nature into artiÞce as a Natural process; as part of GodÕs Master Plan. But
the only master plan you will Þnd in the Þction is located in every municipal corporation planning
ofÞce. It is used for the unlawful but legalized eminent domain of property, so as to fulÞll the plans
of evil men and their legal, New Age, dystopian designs. For the land must be stolen and re-
purposed so that these devils may feed their own will and conceit.

As for earthly (worldly) possessions, what a legal person conquers (purchases) a legal person may
temporarily retain, but the legal person is not property of the man who wields (uses) it. All
property of any legal person may be conÞscated at any time. What man acquires while acting in
persona belongs to the creator of the person, not the mere user of that member-ship. Things
registered (including de-livered infants) in personhood belong to the creator of the person.

This notion of eminent domain is the justiÞcation of unlawful conÞscation. We cannot understand
why this is legal until we break down this word conÞscation into its component parts.

!953
 CONFISCATE - verb transitive - [Latin, a basket, hamper or bag; hence, REVENUE OR THE
EMPERORS TREASURE.] TO ADJUDGE TO BE FORFEITED TO THE PUBLIC
TREASURY, as the goods or estate of a traitor OR OTHER CRIMINAL, by way of penalty;
OR TO CONDEMN PRIVATE FORFEITED PROPERTY TO PUBLIC USE. The estate of the
rebels was seized and conÞscated. - adjective - Forfeited and adjudged to the public treasury,
AS THE GOODS OF A CRIMINAL. (Webs1828)

CON - (repeated) - …1. TO KNOW. 2. TO MAKE ONESELF MASTER OF; TO FIX IN THE
MIND or commit to memory… (Webs1828)

FISC - noun - [Latin Þscus. Fiscus, signiÞes a basket or hanaper, probably from the twigs which
composed the Þrst baskets. Eng. whisk. The word coincides in elements with basket, and Latin
fascia, twigs being the primitive bands.] THE TREASURY OF A PRINCE OR STATE;
HENCE TO CONFISCATE TO TAKE THE GOOD OF A CRIMINAL AND APPROPRIATE
THEN TO THE PUBLIC TREASURE. (Webs1828)

ATE - (repeated) - The preterite of eat, which see. - noun - a’ty. [Gr. mischief; to hurt. Ate is A
PERSONIFICATION OF EVIL, MISCHIEF OR MALICE.] IN PAGAN MYTHOLOGY, THE
GODDESS OF MISCHIEF, who was cast down from heaven by Jupiter. (Webs1828)

—=—

So what can be said about this practice of conÞscation? Perhaps we should start with the fact that
what is condemned becomes public. And that which is condemned is conÞscated for public use. Yet
only criminals have things legally conÞscated from them.

So letÕs do the math hereÉ A public citizenship is subject to conÞscation, is conÞscated at birth, and
is considered as a felon and a subject. The public is subject to eminent domain (conÞscation) with-
out limitation, accept the pretended remedy of “just compensation,” which really only applies to
the private People but is allowed to the public citizenry to keep up constitutional appearances. For
it is the administrative judge that determines what such just compensation is, and very seldom is it
actually just.

The master (con) of the treasury (Þsc) eats (ate) my land and my house!

In Truth, the subject never owned it in the Þrst place, holding merely an imperfect paper title in
legally permissive tenancy (modern feudalism). One cannot lose what one never actually held, and
a Þctional persona can only hold Þctional things. Even the lands of the native ÒAmericanizedÓ
Indians was conquered (purchased) simply because they were made to believe (love) that Real
Land is equal to some magical legal names and words on paper (title).

For conÞscation to take place without choice, one must necessarily be a prisoner (in person) of the
open-air debtor’s prison. No man can rationally consider eminent domain to be in any way as True
Freedom. But it certainly can be and deÞnitely is a part of the commercial franchise of voluntary
servitude called US citizenship.

In other words, mammon Þguratively destroys Nature and its Law, allowing government to be
manÕs father and king. All property is rented from the private People (god) in their sovereign
capacity as landholders, and they can take back their own land whenever they choose through such
legal tools. The tenant must vacate as ordered, and the “government” pays the “just compensation”
out of the condemnation investment funds they set up from taxpayer monies. It’s a perfect crime,
legal in every way, yet utterly and completely corrupt. The property is placed into the public
treasury as conquered (purchased) treasure, and through the escheat laws we are about to discuss it
is granted back to its non-rightful, usurping bloodline holder in posterity, for no rightful prodigal
son returns to reclaim the original line of the lawful blood inheritance.

!954
Personhood destroys individual “religious” and moral belief and demands conformity to the
amoral civil rules governing persons. It is voluntary slavery in every way, just as True christianity is
the opposite forced, as a voluntary slavery to God and the Natural Law. One master, one Law. A
legal person is always morally corrupt as it is birthed from and in a state of false immorality, for a
person is artiÞcial and has not the capacity to act in any way for itself. It is not so much the
corruption as the absence of moral capacity, for the legal law is opposed to moral thought that
leads to the moral actions of the True Self. The man controlling it cannot act morally under its
controlling legal (amoral) law. The man cannot operate a person in any other way than as
authorized and as permitted (licensed) by government. His own moral compunction takes a back
seat to the legal law of persons, while Mother Nature weeps in want and commiseration of her lost
children.

A citizen-ship is literally a contractual relationship for carrying on a permanent state of business in

commerce, as if 24/7 one is an employee (agent) and servant of government. As a more reÞned
description, citizenship is that permissive state of Þctional being by which government grants to a
man certain privileges of membership, speciÞcally the use of government property and money
under that protected legal status. It is permission by satan (the legal adversaries and barrators) to
ignore God and the Laws of Nature even at the expense of our very own Lives and that of others.
And because we use what does not belong to us, government claims the right to charge upon that
use a requirement of usury in the form of fees, Þnes, penalties, taxes, and other extortions and
exactions of every kind.

The renter is created, exists, and subsists only to fulÞll the principalÕs contract and will. The user
always pays for the legally permissive, contractive crime of his use of what is not his own.

As long as we are carriers in person, we will be employed (used) to promote, create, and collect
usury charges. For it is our very legal existence (name) and signature that is the creator of mammon
(valuation in money). This is no different from renting a car and paying the price charged for it and
for the taxes attached to that price (governmentÕs cut), while being required to have insurance upon
the name of the “driver” of that commercial-use vehicle. The person, not the man, is the driver. One
simply cannot publicly rent a car without a full name and identiÞcation as surety! And one may
only rent that car according to the owner's conditions and governing laws, and certainly not his
own. A person is just a vessel rented by a man from government in agency, and he pays for this sin
(synthetic life) with pain, punishment, taxation, licensing and permit fees, Þnes, duties, immoral
obligations and all other symptoms of the commercial, contractual disease called usury.

ItÕs quite simple really. To Live Purely under GodÕs Law in Nature is to be in a state of ease. To live
under the legal law is to be in a state of dis-ease. Quiet vs. disquiet. And to use anotherÕs property
or person is to be in a state of ease-ment.

DIS - …denotes separation, a parting from… (Webs1828)

EASE - Comfort, consolation, contentment, ENJOYMENT, HAPPINESS, pleasure,

satisfaction. (Black4)

EASE - noun - s as z. [Latin otium.] 1. Rest; an undisturbed state. Applied to the body,
freedom from pain, disturbance, excitement or annoyance. He sits at his ease. He takes his
ease. 2. Applied to the mind, a quiet state; tranquillity; freedom from pain, concern, anxiety,
solicitude, or any thing that frets or rufßes the mind. His soul shall dwell at ease. Psalms
25:13. WOE TO THEM THAT ARE AT EASE IN ZION. Amos 6:1. 3. Rest from labor. 4.
Facility; freedom from difÞculty or great labor. One man will perform this service with ease.
This author writes with ease. 5. Freedom from stiffness, harshness, FORCED
EXPRESSIONS, OR UNNATURAL ARRANGEMENT; as the ease of style. 6. FREEDOM
FROM CONSTRAINT OR FORMALITY; UNAFFECTEDNESS; as ease of behavior. At ease
IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE; free from pain or anxiety. - verb transitive - To free from
pain or any disquiet or annoyance, as the body; to relieve; to give rest to; as, the medicine

!955
 has eased the patient. 1. To free from anxiety, CARE or disturbance, as the mind; as, the late
news has eased my mind. 2. TO REMOVE A BURDEN FROM, either of body or mind; to
relieve; with of. Ease me of this load; ease them of their burdens. 3. To mitigate; to alleviate;
to assuage; TO ABATE OR REMOVE IN PART ANY BURDEN, PAIN, GRIEF, ANXIETY
OR DISTURBANCE. Ease thou somewhat the grievous servitude of thy father. 2 Chronicles
10:4. 4. To quiet; to allay; TO DESTROY; as, to ease pain. To ease off or ease away, in seamen's
language, is to slacken a rope gradually. To ease a ship, is to put the helm hard alee, to prevent
her pitching, when close hauled. (Webs1828)

QUIET - adjective - UNMOLESTED; tranquil; FREE FROM INTERFERENCE or disturbance.

(Webs1828)

DISQUIET - adjective - [dis and quiet.] UNQUIET; RESTLESS; UNEASY. [Seldom used.] -
noun - Want of quiet; uneasiness; restlessness; WANT OF TRANQUILITY IN BODY OR
MIND; disturbance; anxiety. - verb transitive - To disturb; TO DEPRIVE OF PEACE, rest or
tranquility; to make uneasy or restless; to harass the body; to fret or VEX THE MIND. That
he may disquiet the inhabitants of Babylon. Jeremiah 1:1. Why hast thou disquieted me. 1
Samuel 28:15. O my soul, why art thou disquieted within me? Psalms 42:5. (Webs1828)

EASEMENT - noun - Convenience; accommodation; that which gives ease, relief or

assistance. He has the advantage of a free lodging, and some other easements. In law, ANY
PRIVILEGE OR CONVENIENCE WHICH ONE MAN HAS OF ANOTHER, either by
PRESCRIPTION or CHARTER, WITHOUT PROFIT; AS A WAY THROUGH HIS LAND,
etc. (Webs1828)

EASEMENT - A right in the owner of one parcel of land, by reason of such ownership, TO
USE THE LAND OF ANOTHER FOR A SPECIAL PURPOSE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH
A GENERAL PROPERTY IN THE OWNER. A privilege which the owner of one adjacent
tenement hath of another, existing in respect of their several tenements, by which that owner
against whose tenement the privilege exists is obliged to suffer or not to do something on or
in regard to his own land for the advantage of him in whose land the privilege exists. Termes
de la Ley, Easements. A privilege, SERVICE, or convenience which one neighbor has of
another, BY PRESCRIPTION, GRANT, OR NECESSARY IMPLICATION, AND WITHOUT
PROFIT; AS A WAY OVER HIS LAND, a gate-way, WATER-COURSE, and the like. A
LIBERTY, privilege, or advantage WITHOUT PROFIT, which the owner of one parcel of
land may have in the lands of another. The land against which the easement or privilege
exists is called the "SERVIENT" tenement, and the estate to which it is annexed the
"DOMINANT" tenement: and their owners are called respectively the "SERVIENT" AND
"DOMINANT" OWNER. These terms are taken from the civil law. Distinguished from
“servitude,” "proÞt ti prendre,” “covenant,” “franchise,” “restriction,” (and)
“prescription.” (Black4)

—=—

One who claims to be a private citizen must know and respect this notion of easements. For this is
the principle of negative duty, as responsible stewardship of land. Ownership is never absolute
concerning the duty man owes to his fellow man, though he never must suffer use of his land for
any purpose that is commercial without beneÞt for that use. The commercial, public citizenship
enjoys only use, and so may never be in a position to partake in such negative easements, for his
law is Þxed and he need not think for himself. He must have public permission or legal license to
commercially travel over the land of others. Everywhere the public person travels is only a
commercial venture, and thus is only an act taken as a permitted (by special or general permit or
license) easement of another’s held land and property. His law is only written, not unwritten; legal,
not of Nature.

A good example of that which would constitute an easement, or that which would constitute a
public consideration even on private land, would be the following:

!956
 PRIVATE POND - A body of water wholly on the lands of a single owner, or of a single
group of joint owners or tenants in common, which did not have any such connection with
any PUBLIC waters that Þsh could pass from one to the other. If pond was so connected
with public waters that at time of high water, Þsh could go in and out, it was not "private
pond" from which defendants could seine Þsh whether Þsh might go out same day or next
season. (Black4)

—=—

Here we Þnd that notion of private responsibility under the Natural Law. If the pond were truly
private and did not in any way effect that which is adjacent or ÒdownstreamÓ from that pond, then
no easement or publicity would be implied, and the land under the water of the pond would be
considered as no different from the private land without water upon it. But when anything shares a
common trait, as the ßow of water in lakes, ponds, rivers, streams, etc., then the concept of
easement comes into play. In this way, the private owner must consider under negative, Natural
Law conditions and responsibility to Nature any actions which might effect the public use of what
is Þrst upon his private estate. His private actions must consider everyone else, public or private,
for he must do no harm to his fellow man above all else. To pollute the water that might ßow to
anotherÕs property, or to that of the public, would be a crime not only against Nature, but against
legal law. While in Nature this is inexcusable and the man is ultimately responsible for his actions,
in the legal realm license is granted to corporations (persons) to pollute the water no matter what
damages might be inßicted downstream. This anarchical pre-pardoning (licensing) of crimes is the
nature of the legal law and its designers, that of total corruption of the Highest, moral Law. This is
why the word license is a simile to the word anarchy. Licensure is legal anarchy; lawlessness in
Nature by permission of the legal law that recreates Nature into its own Þctional representation.
And so even man cannot complain because he is only acting in Þction, not Nature, though he may
receive money as damages as he dies from the cancers that will kill him. In this legal hell and
warped moral corruption of the legalistic state of the common manÕs mind, money will likely make
the man temporarily but artiÞcially happy despite his bodily or property damages, and he may
even feel he has won some twisted form of a moral battle in court, though all he received was a
debt-money payoff, and the criminal he sued never actually pays in any tangible way for his actual
crimes. Remember, all public crimes are monetary. If anything, money is used by that wealthy elite
to purchase and shelf the moral compunction and retribution of men for any immoral acts
committed against us. Money makes the commercial world go round, which conversely and
necessarily makes crime rampant and unpunished except by Þctional, insigniÞcant means. The
creators of money will never run out, and so they will never be unable to purchase a legal pardon
for their crimes, especially those committed upon their pledged and publicly subjected slaves.

To fully grasp how we as citizen-ships are constantly in a state of easement on anotherÕs property,
we must go back to our origins. We are birthed into a district (seizure) of the United States, there-
fore that legally created persona (legal status) is only domiciled in the United States, Washington,
in that District of New Columbia. That is our only legal Òland,Ó and our status (persona) is an
artiÞcial part of that movable, legal Òland.Ó But itÕs not actual land, only the artiÞcial title of it.
Therefore wherever we go or set up residence (settle) within the geographical jurisdiction of the 50
independent state governments of that union (covenant), we are in a state of special (of species)
easement. We are permanent, foreign neighbors, if you will, whom are always intruding on our
neighbors lands and never go home. And so to travel upon the land of our neighboring states, all
50 of them, we need a legal capacity in which we may make our way over that legal, Þctional Òland.Ó
Thus we are granted a public easement via licensure and passport by the private owners of that
land (the States as the People) through their government (agent), and we call this a citizen-ship.
This publicly granted ship Þguratively ßies the national ßag of its master, as its Arms, just as ships
on the sea do today and did in days of old, signifying the origin of its birth and the purpose of its
commercial journey. But a ship may only sail upon the virtual water-course of the law of the sea.
This is public citizen-ship, signifying that man has no relation to any land and that his only
purpose in being there is for the beneÞt of his master and upon its sea (sacred/cursed See). His

!957
ship never docks, for it cannot ever Þnd (hold) actual land (GodÕs Creation), and so his entire
journey, his ad-venture, is only one of permissive public easement upon private lands held by
another in trust. We are the water people.

If there were a truthful sign posted at each boarder for each State on each highway (virtual water-
way), it would say: Welcome to the land of all free, private bloodlines of the Posterity of this State (People)
and to all others. Foreign, public commercial residents to travel in legal ships (federally issued persons) only.

Understanding our place in this nation, unfortunately, goes against all weÕve been taught in the
ÒpublicÓ schools and churches. For they only teach the common language, and those teaching it are
equally fooled by the trickery of word magic. Parrots. Masters of their own delusions. Tricked by
their own empty use of anotherÕs words of art. For the common language is the public language.
ÒEducatorsÓ never tell us that our blood was corrupted. They never tell us that we are foreigners
(neighbors) upon the land we live. And they never tell us that every action we take is a commercial
privilege granted to us by our neighboring State through agency. They simply have no idea this is
so. For they, the instructors, are merely us; the blind leading the blind. And their ßattering titles of
teacher, professor, and doctor do not make them knowledgeable, but only burdened and branded as
well-trained animals allowed to in turn become animal trainers.

All of our political rights as US citizen-ships, all our so-called liberties, all our privileges, and all of
our duties, are nothing more than easements granted to the person we are in bond and surety to, so
that we may as registered agents carry on commercial activity within that StateÕs prison (govern-
ment and district). We serve our person, and therefore we serve no other purpose than as foreign
commodities in service and in usury to both our servient (subordinate) keepers in agency and our
dominant (domiciliary) owners as principal.

To Live on the land with no dominant holder before you but God would be a Pure State of ease, of
rest (Noah). To be a servant in owner-ship of someone else's property causes a dis-ease. And with
disease comes the symptoms of disease, that being all legal requirements and taxes upon the per-
son as a subject in servient position upon the land of another that holds the domiciliary or perfect,
non-defective title. The beneÞt of easements are descriptive of the general anatomy of these
symptoms.

CONTINUING EASEMENT - One that is self-perpetuating, independent of human

intervention, as, the ßow of a stream, or one which may be ENJOYED WITHOUT ANY ACT
ON THE PART OF THE PERSON ENTITLED THERETO, such as a spout which discharges
the water when it rains, a drain by which surface water is carried off, windows which admit
light and air, and the like. Also, it is sometimes termed an "apparent" easement, and deÞned as
one depending on some artiÞcial structure upon, or natural conformation of, the servient
tenement, OBVIOUS AND PERMANENT, which CONSTITUTES the easement or is the
MEANS OF ENJOYING IT. (Black4)

—=—

This is a fancy, legal way of avoiding the name of God, stating that a continuing or Permanent state
of Being upon Jehovah as an act of God (such as a Naturally ßowing stream) needs no legal (false)
easement attached to it. It Exists despite manÕs actions or word-magic, a self-evident act of God that
was not created by the designs of man.

However, once that Natural State of Being is relegated into a legal easement, the Natural Law no
longer applies. The stream may be touched, polluted, and tainted by the man living in corruption of
his own blood. All Þctional persons in usufruct fall under the following easements:

DISCONTINUING EASEMENT - Discontinuous, non-continuous, or non-apparent

easements are those the enjoyment of which can be had ONLY BY THE INTERFERENCE
OF MAN, as, a RIGHT OF WAY or a right to draw water. (Black4)

!958
INTERMITTENT EASEMENT - One which is usable or used only at times, and not
continuously. (Black4)

NEGATIVE EASEMENT - Those where the owner of the SERVIENT ESTATE is prohibited
from doing something OTHERWISE LAWFUL upon his estate, BECAUSE IT WILL AFFECT
THE DOMINANT ESTATE, (as interrupting the light and air from the latter by building on
the former). As to "reciprocal negative easement,” see that title, infra. (Black4)

RECIPROCITY - Mutuality. The term is used in international law to denote the relation
existing between two states when each of them GIVES THE SUBJECTS OF THE OTHER
CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, on condition that its own subjects shall enjoy similar privileges at
the hands of the latter state. (Black4)

RECIPROCAL NEGATIVE EASEMENT - If the owner of two or more lots, so situated as to

bear the relation, sells one with RESTRICTIONS OF BENEFIT to the land retained, the
servitude becomes mutual, and, during the period of RESTRAINT, the owner of the lot or
lots retained can do nothing forbidden to the owner of the lot sold; this being known as the
doctrine of "reciprocal negative easement.” (Black4)

RECIPROCAL NEGATIVE EASEMENT - The term given to an easement that originates

from a restriction LIMITING THE USE OF A PROPERTY FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES.
(Black2)

RESTRAIN - To LIMIT, conÞne, abridge, narrow down, restrict, obstruct, impede, hinder,
stay, destroy. To prohibit from action; to put compulsion upon; to restrict; to hold or press
back. TO ENJOIN (in equity). (Black4)

RESTRAINING POWERS - Restrictions or limitations imposed upon the exercise of a

power by the donor thereof. (Black4)

RESTRAINT - ConÞnement, abridgment, or LIMITATION. Prohibition of action; holding or

pressing back from action. Hindrance, CONFINEMENT, or restriction OF LIBERTY.
Obstruction, HINDRANCE OR DESTRUCTION OF TRADE OR COMMERCE. (Black4)

RESTRAINT OF TRADE - Contracts or combinations which tend or are designed to

eliminate or stiße competition, EFFECT A MONOPOLY, ARTIFICIALLY MAINTAIN
PRICES, or otherwise hamper or obstruct the COURSE of trade and commerce AS IT
WOULD BE CARRIED ON IF LEFT TO THE CONTROL OF NATURAL AND ECONOMIC
FORCES. With reference to contracts between individuals, a restraint of trade is said to be
"general" or "special." A contract which forbids a person to employ his talents, industry, or
capital IN ANY UNDERTAKING within the limits of the state or country is in "general"
restraint of trade; if it forbids him to employ himself in a designated trade or business,
either for a limited time or WITHIN A PRESCRIBED AREA or DISTRICT, it is in "special"
restraint of trade. "Restraint of trade" at which the Sherman Anti-Trust Act is aimed, are only
those which are comparable to restraints deemed illegal AT COMMON LAW. (Black4)

RESTRAINT ON ALIENATION - Restriction of the power of aliening property. See

Perpetuity. In English practice, as applied to counsel, a notice given to a counsel by an
attorney on behalf of the plaintiff or defendant in an action, in order to secure his services as
advocate when the cause comes on for trial. In old English usage. A SERVANT, not menial or
familiar, that is, NOT CONTINUALLY DWELLING IN THE HOUSE OF HIS MASTER,
BUT ONLY WEARING HIS LIVERY, and attending sometimes upon special occasions.
(Black4)

RESTRICT - TO RESTRAIN WITHIN BOUNDS; TO LIMIT; TO CONFINE. (Black4)

!959
 RESTRICTION - In the case of land registered under the English land transfer act, 1875, an
entry on the register made on the application of the registered proprietor of the land, the effect
of which is to prevent the transfer of the land or the creation of any charge upon it, unless
notice of the application for a transfer or charge is sent by post to a certain address, or
unless the consent of a certain person or persons to the transfer or charge is obtained, or
unless some other thing is done. (Black4)

RESTRICTED LANDS - Lands the alienation of which is SUBJECT to restrictions imposed

by Congress TO PROTECT THE INDIANS FROM THEIR OWN SUPPOSED
INCOMPETENCY. (Black4)

—=—

Sadly, it was the legalization of the indian tribes that defeated them. It was the acceptance of legal
personhood and the proprietary (unique) identiÞcation of each individual of the tribe. Their
oneness was stripped apart. They were then able to be legally considered (with legal capacity) as a
Ònatural personÓ of each tribe (in ethnicity), and with this simple spelling of word magic they have
been defeated ever since. Their defeat stems from the same causal root as our own, which is
original (ancestral) sin. They are seen only as persons (Þction), not men. To be a Free man is not the
same and is quite opposed to being part (borne/carried) of a nation. Just more word trickery,
playing upon the proudness of the tribal spirit by fooling men into participating in the legal
version (incorporation) and recreation of the tribe into a nation. All ab-originals are conquered
(purchased) through similar artiÞce, by terms of art, and by the introduction of mammon. You
might say that those private Indians contracted the dis-ease of publicity, of original (ancestral) sin
from the incorporated white man, along with other more exotic diseases of the medical juris-
prudence. Their True tribal culture was changed to a legal Ònationality,Ó their men recreated
through the lie of Þctional id-entity into legal personas.

EXOTIC - adjective - [Gr. without.] FOREIGN; PERTAINING TO OR PRODUCED IN A

FOREIGN COUNTRY; NOT NATIVE; extraneous; as an exotic plant; an exotic TERM OR
WORD. - noun - A plant, shrub or tree not native; a plant PRODUCED IN A FOREIGN
COUNTRY. 1. A WORD OF FOREIGN ORIGIN. (Webs1828)

CONTRACTED - participle passive - 1. DRAWN TOGETHER, or into a shorter or narrower

compass; shrunk; BETROTHED; incurred; BARGAINED. - adjective - 2. Narrow; MEAN;
SELFISH; AS A MAN OF A CONTRACTED SOUL OR MIND. (Webs1828)

—=—

As a public US citizen-ship in agency keeping residence within one of the 50 several (private) states
united, no matter which state you currently reside within, the property and land you think you
ÒownÓ outright is actually in a negative easement and usufruct. Again, US citizens (foreign
residents) cannot hold and dispose of land or property in any of these neighboring foreign states.
They can only use property and land belonging to others. Therefore, you the reader and public US
citizenship (if that is your status), as only user of that property, are bound to get permits, licenses,
and other permissive qualiÞcations before you can alter or sell that property, BECAUSE IT
BELONGS TO SOMEONE ELSE! The actual landholders, entitled Òthe PeopleÓ that make up the
ÒState,Ó constituted that corporate, commercial state government (corporation) speciÞcally to
administer residential foreign agents of the United States, whose domicile is Washington DC. To be
clear, no US citizen-ship can be an actual land holder, only a user. The commercial sea Þguratively
prevents us from touching the land.

PRIVATE OR PUBLIC EASEMENTS - A private easement is one in which the enjoyment is

RESTRICTED to one or a few individuals, while a public easement is one the right to the
enjoyment of which is VESTED IN THE PUBLIC GENERALLY or in an entire community;
such as an easement of PASSAGE ON THE PUBLIC STREETS AND HIGHWAYS OR OF
NAVIGATION ON A STREAM. (Black4)

!960
 QUASI EASEMENT - An "easement," in the proper sense of the word, can only exist in respect
of two adjoining pieces of land occupied by different persons, and can only impose A
NEGATIVE DUTY on the owner of the servient tenement. Hence an obligation on the owner
of land to repair the fence between his and his neighbor's land is not a true easement, but is
sometimes called a "quasi easement.” (Black4)

EASEMENT BY PRESCRIPTION - A mode of acquiring title to property by immemorial or

long-continued enjoyment, and refers to personal usage restricted to claimant and his
ancestors or grantors. (Black4)

EASEMENT IN GROSS - Easement in gross is NOT APPURTENANT to any estate in land

(or not belonging to any person by virtue of his ownership of an estate in land) but a MERE
PERSONAL INTEREST IN, OR RIGHT TO USE, THE LAND OF ANOTHER. (Black4)

EASEMENT OF ACCESS - Right of ingress and egress to and from the premises of a lot
owner to a street appurtenant to the land of the lot owner. (Black4)

EASEMENT OF CONVENIENCE - One which increases the facility, comfort, or convenience

of the enjoyment of the dominant estate, or of some right connected with it. (Black4)

EQUITABLE EASEMENTS - The special easements created by derivation of ownership of

adjacent proprietors from a common source, with speciÞc intentions as to buildings for
certain purposes, or with implied privileges in regard to certain uses, are sometimes so
called. A name frequently applied to building restrictions in a deed. (Black4)

—=—

Like any disease, the only way to rid oneself permanently of any and all symptoms is to rid oneself
in totality of the dis-ease. And so the only way to rid oneself of mammon is to stop being a carrier
of its commercial seed (its person) in that dis-eased state of society. Being a carrier of the legal
status of public personhood is that dis-ease, manifested legally as a public easement. Serfdom, debt
slavery, and loss of all Natural (negative) rights are the symptoms. For no legal easements would
be needed if all men followed voluntarily the Natural Law, for the negative duties implied would
prevent the trespass in the Þrst place. To be a Free Living man under GodÕs Supreme Law and
Authority or (versus) to be the sick carrier and puppet of ÒsatanÕsÓ artiÞce (the ÒadversaryÓ to man
and Nature)… is that really even a serious choice, or just an unknown one to most men?

After all, God is the True holder (Creator) of all lands, all men, and all things. Governments are
merely users of GodÕs Domain, pretending to take His place. Anti-GodÉ And this makes God a
third party to citizens of the United States, for manÕs relation to GodÕs Nature is only through his
governing magistrates (idols posing as gods) and through legalized corporate religions with license
to legally practice state-sanctioned “religion.” If a citizen is always in person, in mammon, then
how can the man expect to reach out and touch God? His person is likened to a body glove, a
complete prophylactic that prevents manÕs ability to commune with God and Nature in any Real
sense.

One cannot worship and respect God while carrying the StateÕs burden and thus its legal code.

CARRIER - One UNDERTAKING to transport persons or property, or one EMPLOYED IN

OR ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CARRYING goods for others for hire. In common
speech, "carriers" means transportation systems as distinguished from corporations owning or
operating them… A school bus acts as a “carrier…” COMMON carriers are those that hold
themselves out or UNDERTAKE to carry persons or goods or all persons indifferently, or of
ALL WHO CHOOSE TO EMPLOY IT, or those whose occupation or business is
transportation of persons or things for hire or reward. Common carriers of passengers are

!961
 those that undertake to carry all persons indifferently who may apply for passage, so long as
there is room, and there is no legal excuse for refusal. Private carriers are those who transport
or UNDERTAKE to transport IN A PARTICULAR INSTANCE for hire or reward. (Black4)

CARRIAGE - A vehicle used especially for the transportation of persons either for
PLEASURE OR BUSINESS, and drawn by horses or other draught animals over the ordinary
streets and highways of the country; not including cars used exclusively upon railroads or
street railroads expressly constructed for the use of such cars. THE ACT OF CARRYING, OR
A CONTRACT FOR TRANSPORTATION OF PERSONS OR GOODS. As used in
exemption statutes, INCLUDES AN AUTOMOBILE, and it includes motor vehicles under
various other circumstances. In admiralty, "carriage" includes ability to lift a cargo and
HOLD IT AFLOAT, and does not necessarily involve any translation of the vessel from one
place to another. The business of carriage is that arising under contracts by which a person
obligates himself, for an agreed price, to transport, or have transported, an object of some
kind, to a designated place. The contract of carriage is a contract for the conveyance of
property, persons, or messages, from one place to another. (Black4)

CARGO - In mercantile law. The LOAD or LADING of a vessel; the goods, merchandise, or
WHATEVER IS CONVEYED IN A SHIP OR OTHER MERCHANT VESSEL. While "cargo"
is primarily the load of the ship, it may have a varying meaning. The term may be applied in
such a sense as to include passengers, as well as freight, but in a technical sense it designates
goods only. (Black4)

LOADING - The act of putting a load on or in; AS TO LOAD A BEAST OF BURDEN, a car
or A VESSEL; hence, TO CHARGE AS WITH A LOAD OR BURDEN. The difference
between gross and net premiums on (insurance) policies. (Black4)

—=—

To be more precise, public persons are charged with debt and obligation at birth as their burden
(load). But this kind of debt cannot simply be paid with more debt money, for all money in
mammon represents the same charge upon all other men birthed into this system. And so we must
deÞne what it is to be a debtor. For while you can have no outstanding monetary debt in your
Þnancial statements in consideration of corporations, banks, etc., you will always be a permanent
debtor of government as surety to its citizen-ship. Your debt to government is again a performance
debt; a contract to perform. In other words, the only way to fulÞll the contract is to act per the form
of a person and to thus be bound by the legal laws of persons in a commercial, public under-taking.
A person is a debtor, and man must play as an actor in this part to gain beneÞts from the master of
all puppets (persons). But most importantly, it is debt and debt alone that creates the ability for one
to be punished, for there is no debt without the doctrine of master and servant. Debt always has a
principal and agent, a giver and a receiver, a creditor and a debtor. Without the form of implied
performance debt attached to every public citizen-ship, the government (principal) would have no
ability to sanction (punish) its agents. So naturally it is government that reserves the right to create,
control, regulate the weights and measures of, and hold exclusive right of printing and credit under
its central banking structure. Only a fool would agree to such a power as allowing total control of
the only legally accepted money system, and thus the power of creating (constituting) perpetual
debt upon all persons. Yet that’s exactly what we agree to (tacitly) when we sign (express) the sig-
nature of government property (the admixed surname and christian name). And to be clear, the use
of another’s property, including a legal persona (status), is always a debt of performance bound
under the law of contract. To accept debt is to accept sanctioned tyranny.

DEBT - noun - det. [Latin debitum, CONTRACTED.] 1. That which is due from one person to
another, whether money, GOODS, or SERVICES; that which ONE PERSON IS BOUND TO
PAY OR PERFORM TO ANOTHER; as the debts of a bankrupt; the debts of a nobleman. IT
IS A COMMON MISFORTUNE OR VICE TO BE IN DEBT. WHEN YOU RUN IN DEBT
YOU GIVE TO ANOTHER POWER OVER YOUR LIBERTY. 2. That which any one is

!962
 obliged to do or to suffer. Your son, my lord, has paid a soldier's debt. Hence death is called
the debt of nature. 3. In law, an action to recover a debt. This is a customary ellipsis. He
brought debt instead of an action of debt. 4. In scripture, SIN; TRESPASS; GUILT; CRIME;
THAT WHICH RENDERS LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT. Forgive us our debts. Lord's Prayer.
(Webs1828)

PERFORM - verb transitive - [Latin per and formo, to make.] 1. To do; TO EXECUTE; to
accomplish; as, to perform two days' labor in one day; to perform a noble deed or
achievement. 2. TO EXECUTE; TO DISCHARGE; AS, TO PERFORM A DUTY OR OFFICE.
3. TO FULFILL; as, TO PERFORM A COVENANT, PROMISE OR CONTRACT; to perform
a vow. - verb intransitive - To do; TO ACT A PART. The player performs well in different
CHARACTERS. The musician performs well on the organ. (Webs1828)

PERFORMANCE - noun - Execution or completion of any thing; a doing; as the performance

of work or OF AN UNDERTAKING; THE PERFORMANCE OF DUTY. 1. ACTION; DEED;
thing done. 2. THE ACTING OR EXHIBITION OF CHARACTER ON THE STATE. Garrick
was celebrated for his theatrical performances. 3. Composition; work written. Few of our
comic performances give good examples. 4. The acting or exhibition of feats; as performances
of horsemanship. (Webs1828)

—=—

If you comprehend what is stated here, then you should be coming to a very distinct revelation.
Debt is sin. A constitution is a debt compact. Citizenship is a debt. Debt is that which makes us
liable to punishment. There is simply no ignoring of this fact.

The debt charged as an obligation of service must be performed and discharged. The charge must
be extinguished, the contract executed, and the ship docked (rendered back to Caesar/the district).
Like electricity, the man must become grounded upon God’s earth once more, shedding all legal
artiÞce, so that the legal charge may dissipate. For we all know that water is a conductor for
electricity, not a discharger. So man cannot discharge his debt and obligation while on the sea of
commerce. Only God’s Nature, his very own Nature, can save him. Until then, the man is
considered merely as cargo upon the citizen-ship, caught in a permanent state of burden and
carried through the holy see of the false gods. The birth certiÞcate is that initial charge, the creation
of life (evil) as a bill of lading.

CARGA - In Spanish law. An incumbrance; A CHARGE. (Black4)

CARGAISON - In French commercial law. Cargo; LADING. (Black4)

CARGARE - In old English law. TO CHARGE. (Black4)

BILL - A formal declaration, complaint, or statement of particular things IN WRITING… In

commercial law. A written statement of the terms of a contract, or SPECIFICATION OF THE
ITEMS OF A TRANSACTION OR OF A DEMAND; also a general name for any item of
indebtedness, whether receivable or payable. Accounts for goods sold, services rendered, or
work done. (Black4)

LADING - participle present tense - LOADING; CHARGING WITH A BURDEN or freight;

throwing or dipping out. (Webs1828)

LADING - noun - That which CONSTITUTES A LOAD OR CARGO; freight; BURDEN; as

the lading of a SHIP. Acts 27:10. (Webs1828)

ORIGINAL BILL OF LADING - Bill of lading that is used when DELIVERING a shipment
or to Þle a claim for DAMAGED OR LOST GOODS. OTHER COPIES ARE ONLY FOR
RECORDS. (Black2)

!963
 CERTIFIED BILL OF LADING - To CERTIFY THAT A SHIPMENT MEETS THE
IMPORTING COUNTRY'S REGULATIONS, the importing country's consul in the
exporter's country, ISSUES THIS CERTIFICATE. (Black2)

—=—

In legal law, a child is not considered as a Living sentient being, only a piece of certiÞed paper
representing some recorded vital statistics of a legal status in law (a Þctional person). A child is a
legal issue, birthed (issued) from the matrix (paper womb) of government in lading. The original
bill of lading, that original birth certiÞcate from which all certiÞed copies are made is called a
matrix. And this is how all persons are potential agents of the legal matrix simulation, as
deceivingly portrayed in the movie by that same name. We act in the sur-name birthed by the state
and legally (artfully) attached to our christian name.

MATRIX - Womb. A PLACE WHERE ANYTHING IS GENERATED OR FORMED. (Samuel

Johnson's Dictionary, 1755)

MATRIX - In civil law, THE PROTOCOL OR FIRST DRAFT OF A LEGAL INSTRUMENT,

FROM WHICH ALL COPIES MUST BE TAKEN. (Black4)

ISSUE - noun - …The act of issuing, sending forth, emitting or promulgating; THE GIVING
A THING ITS FIRST INCEPTION; as the issue of an order or a writ. - verb - To send forth; to
emit; to promulgate; as, an ofÞcer issues orders, process issues from a court. TO PUT INTO
CIRCULATION; as, the treasury issues notes. To send out, to send out ofÞcially; TO
DELIVER, FOR USE, or authoritatively; to go forth, as authoritative or BINDING. (Black4)

—=—

The Real mother is responsible for the bodily conception in Reality (in Nature) of a baby, but is also
simultaneously tricked into becoming a contractual, legal informer. She, while already acting in
surety to a legal persona (property), certiÞes through a series of volunteered vital statistics
(proprietary words of art) that a felonious legal conception in appearance/Þction (false truth by
deception) was created at the same time as that Real Life, so as to abandon her baby in the district
(seizure) as pirate booty. Now lost at sea, the baby will thus be found as ßotsam on the virtual water,
as an infant of unknown parentage; a bastard with no heir-apparent inheritable blood. And all
found treasure belongs to the king (legal sovereignty). That certiÞed matrix is the artiÞcial mother
(person), which contemplates the legal state (national district) as the adoptive father Ñ a corporate,
artiÞcial person; an artiÞcial womb.

—=—

“A thing which has no owner NATURALLY belongs to the Þrst

FINDER.”
—RES NULLIUS NATURALITER FIT PRIMI OCCUPANTIS. (Black4)

—=—

This act of de-livery (abandonment) creates the charge that is placed upon the artiÞcial life called
the person (status). As the child grows into that legal matrix system, he or she never knows any-
thing different from what the legal simulation provides, for the parents were also entrained,
educated, and reared within that public-minded system and similarly conÞrmed their own existence
as an imaginary legal Þction. They know nothing of Nature and God and so can teach their
children nothing of Nature and God. To be born in the legal matrix (the nation) is to be a child of
the matrix (the nation).

!964
And as that Þctional movie told the story of how man is plugged-in and used (employed) merely as
batteries to charge the simulation that imprisons them, this was only a metaphor about a metaphor,
for we are charged by the legal system at birth and spend our dead lives in Þction in the
performance debt of that artiÞcial creditor called government, the artiÞcially protective womb.
Again, Reality is stranger than any Hollywood production, and its scientiÞc fantasies in movie and
television form are only designed to blind you from Real Life, from NatureÕs God, disguising the
legal Þction that utterly controls and imprisons your mind, body, and soul as the only possible
truth, the only course and path to follow.

CHARGE - verb transitive - 1. To rush on; to fall on; to attack, especially with Þxed bayonets;
as, an army charges the enemy. 2. To load, as a musket or cannon; to thrust in powder, or
powder and ball or shot. 3. TO LEAD OR BURDEN; TO THROW ON OR IMPOSE THAT
WHICH OPPRESSES; as, to charge the stomach with indigestible food; or to LAY on, or to Þll,
without oppressing; as, to charge the memory with rules and precepts; to charge the mind
with facts. 4. To set or lay on; to impose, AS A TAX; as, the land is charged with a quit rent;
A RENT IS A CHARGE ON THE LAND. 5. To lay on or impose, as a task. The gospel
chargeth us with piety towards God. 6. To put or lay on; as, to charge a building with
ornaments, often implying superßuity. 7. To lay on, as a DUTY; followed by with. The
commander charged the ofÞcer with the execution of the project. See Genesis 40:4 8. To entrust
to; as, an ofÞcer is charged with dispatches. 9. To set to, AS A DEBT; to place on the debit
side of an account; as, TO CHARGE A MAN WITH THE PRICE OF GOODS SOLD TO
HIM. 10. TO LOAD OR LAY ON IN WORDS, SOMETHING WRONG, REPROACHFUL
OR CRIMINAL; to impute to; as, to charge a man with theft. 11. To lay on IN WORDS; to
impute to; followed by on before the PERSON; as, to charge a crime on the offender; to
charge evil consequences on the doctrines of the stoics. 12. To lay on, give or
COMMUNICATE, as an order, command or earnest request; TO ENJOIN; to exhort. In all
this, Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly. Job 1:22É Charge them that are rich in this
world, that they be not high-minded. 1 Timothy 4:1. In this sense, when the command is given
IN THE NAME OF GOD, OR WITH AN OATH, the phrase amounts to AN ADJURATION.
TO ADJURE; TO BIND BY AN OATH. 1 Samuel 14:28. 14. To give directions to; to instruct
authoritatively; as, the judge charged the grand jury to inquire respecting breaches of the
peace. 15. To communicate electrical matter to, as to a coated vial, or an electrical battery. - verb
intransitive - To make an onset. Thus Glanville says, like your heroes of antiquity, he charges in
iron; and we say, to charge with Þxed bayonets. But in this application, the object is under-
stood; to charge the enemy. - noun - 1. That which is laid on or in; in a general sense, ANY
LOAD OR BURDEN. IT IS THE SAME WORD RADICALLY AS CARGOÉ 3. An onset; a
rushing on an enemy; ATTACK; especially by moving troops with Þxed bayonets. But it is
used for an onset of cavalry as well as of infantry. 4. An order, injunction, mandate,
command. Moses gave Joshua a charge. Numbers 27:19. The king gave charge concerning
Absalom. 2 Samuel 18:5. 5. That which is ENJOINED, COMMITTED, entrusted or
DELIVERED TO ANOTHER, IMPLYING CARE, CUSTODY, OVERSIGHT, OR DUTY TO
BE PERFORMED BY THE PERSON ENTRUSTED. I gave Hanani charge over Jerusalem.
Nehemiah 7:2. Hence the word includes any trust or commission; AN OFFICE, DUTY,
EMPLOYMENT. It is followed by of or over; more generally by of. Hence, 6. THE PERSON
OR THING COMMITTED TO ANOTHER’S CUSTODY, CARE OR MANAGEMENT; A
TRUST. Thus the people of a parish are called the ministers charge. The starry guardian
drove his charge away to some fresh pasture. 7. Instructions given by a judge to a jury, or by a
bishop to his clergy. The word may be used as synonymous with command, direction,
exhortation or injunction, but always implies solemnity. 8. Imputation in a bad sense;
ACCUSATION. Lay not this sin to their charge. Acts 7:60. 9. THAT WHICH CONSTITUTES
DEBT, in commercial transactions; an entry of money or the price of goods, on the debit side
of an account. 10. Cost; expense; as, the charges of the war are to be BORNE BY THE
NATION. 11. IMPOSITION ON LAND OR ESTATE; RENT, TAX, OR WHATEVER
CONSTITUTES A BURDEN OR DUTY. 12. In military affairs, a signal to attack; as, to sound
the charge. 13. The posture of a weapon Þtted for an attack or combat. Their armed slaves in

!965
 charge… 15. IN HERALDRY, that which is BORNE upon the COLOR; or the FIGURES
REPRESENTED on the escutcheon, BY WHICH THE BEARERS ARE DISTINGUISHED
FROM ONE ANOTHER… (Webs1828)

ISSUE - In REALTY LAW. - DESCENDANTS. All PERSONS who have descended from a
common ancestor. Offspring; progeny; descent; lineage; lineal descendants. In this sense, the
word includes not only a child or children, but all other descendants IN WHATEVER
DEGREE; and it is so construed generally in deeds. But, when used in wills, it is, of course,
subject to the rule of construction that the intention of the testator, as ascertained from the
will, is to have effect, RATHER THAN THE TECHNICAL MEANING OF THE
LANGUAGE USED BY HIM; and hence issue may in such a connection, be restricted to
children, or to descendants living at the death of the testator, where such an intention clearly
appears. The word "issue" in a WILL is generally a word of LIMITATION, and when so
used, is sometimes said to be equivalent to “HEIRS OF THE BODY.” But it has been pointed
out in other cases that this word is not as strong a word of limitation as the words "heirs of the
body,” and yields readily to a context INDICATING ITS USE AS A WORD OF PURCHASE.
The word is commonly HELD TO INCLUDE ONLY LEGITIMATE ISSUE. (Black4)

LAWFUL ISSUE - The TERM that is given to PEOPLE who are ABLE TO INHERIT due to
KINSHIP. (Black2)

LEGAL ISSUE - Another term used to describe a PERSON'S descendants and is the same as
lawful issue. (Black2)

NATURAL ISSUE - Term given to describe the CHILDREN BORN OF THEIR PARENTS
and are NOT ADOPTED. (Black2)

—=—

Note the difference here between an actual inheritable blood issue (child) and that of a corrupted
blood issue. One is an heir according to law, and one is not. The second one needs a will, for no
heirs are assumed. This is the tainted status of a public citizen-ship of the United States. Note also
that the bloodline of posterity and lineage is of the realty law, meaning that the only purpose of the
keeping of these fabled genealogy records is an attachment to land. Land and blood stand in a
Þgurative oneness.

And just what happens when our blood is legally corrupted?

We issue no heir and our life and death is rendered as a pointless endeavor in mammon without
bearing legitimate seed or fruit. Of course, in Reality one’s blood Lives on, but in consideration by
the Þctional legal realm the family chain was decimated, the bloodline made extinct! And the child
passes on this legacy of nothing-ness to all future offspring that will all die in succession but
without lawful issue, for he may only pass on his own status, never any that is higher than his own
persona. As the Þrst, so be the last. To correct his childÕs (dependentÕs) status he must Þrst Þx his
own.

DIE WITHOUT CHILDREN, HEIRS, OR ISSUE - In a will, as applied to realty, prima facie
imports an INDEFINITE FAILURE OF ISSUE, — TOTAL EXTINCTION OF THE
TESTATOR'S FAMILY, or the DEATH OF ALL HIS DESCENDANTS to the remotest
generation. This has uniformly been the construction, when there were no expressions in the
will controlling the legal meaning of the words, or pointing to a deÞnite failure of issue. As
applied to personalty, construed to mean dying without heirs LIVING at the death of the
devisee. When there is anything in a gift or limitation to show that the testator meant a failure
of issue in the life-time of the Þrst taker, instead of an indeÞnite failure, a limitation over is
construed as an executory devise in defeasance of a fee-simple, and not as a remainder
sustained by an estate-tail. Whether a presumption that a person died without issue will be

!966
 indulged depends upon the circumstances shown in each case. If, for instance,
circumstances are proven indicating non-marriage or childlessness, THEN DEATH WITH-
OUT ISSUE MAY BE PRESUMED. See further DeÞnite; Issue. (WCA1889)

—=—

Let the reader be very clear by this point that the above deÞnition applies to any and all of you that
claim or have ever claimed US citizenship without proof of quitting. I seriously doubt that anyone
reading this is accidentally acting in a private capacity. One simply does not Live a private Life and
not know his status and that below it. The artiÞcial default in this legal design has been set, and all
of its public roads lead straight to the public domain of the metaphoric realm of Caesar. No man
can escape this publicly gridded web unless his father had paternally guided him to his own
private blood-inheritance. This knowledge is openly kept under the rose, though placed deftly and
without cypher into that disguising lexicon of English dog-Latin. But the legalese of Romanized
concepts reveals these artiÞcial constructs.

KIN - Relation or relationship BY BLOOD or consanguinity. "The nearness of kin is

computed according to the civil law." As to "next of kin," see NEXT. (Black2)

NEXI - Latin. In Roman law, bound; BOUND PERSONS. A term applied to such insolvent
DEBTORS as were DELIVERED UP TO THEIR CREDITORS, by whom they might be
HELD IN BONDAGE UNTIL THEIR DEBTS WERE DISCHARGED. (Black4)

NEXUM - Latin. In Roman law, in ancient times the nexum seems to have been a species of
FORMAL CONTRACT, involving a loan of money, and at tended with peculiar
consequences, solemnized with the "copper and balance." Later, it appears to have been used
as a general term for any contract struck with those ceremonies, and hence to have
INCLUDED THE SPECIAL FORM OF CONVEYANCE CALLED "MANCIPATIO." In a
general sense it means the obligation or bond between contracting parties. In Roman law,
this word expressed the TIE OR OBLIGATION involved in the old conveyance by
mancipatio; and came latterly to be used interchangeably with (but less frequently than) the
word "obligatio" itself. (Black4)

PATERFAMILIAS - The FATHER of a family. In Roman law. The head or MASTER of a

family. This word is sometimes employed, in a wide sense, as equivalent to sui juris. A
person sui juris is called "paterfamilias" even when under the age of puberty. In the
narrower and more common use, a paterfamilias is ANY ONE INVESTED WITH POTESTAS
OVER ANY PERSON. It is thus as applicable to a grandfather as to a father. (Black4)

POTESTAS - Latin. In the civil law. Power; authority; DOMINATION; EMPIRE.

IMPERIUM, OR THE JURISDICTION OF MAGISTRATES. THE POWER OF THE
FATHER OVER HIS CHILDREN, patria potestas. THE AUTHORITY OF MASTERS OVER
THEIR SLAVES. (Black4)

PATRIA POTESTAS - Latin. In Roman law. PATERNAL AUTHORITY; THE PATERNAL

POWER. This term denotes the aggregate of those peculiar powers and rights which, by the
civil law of Rome, belonged to the head of a family in respect to his wife, children, (natural
or adopted,) and any more remote descendants who sprang from him through males only.
Anciently, it was of very extensive reach, embracing even the power of life and death, but
was gradually curtailed, until Þnally it amounted to little more than a right in the
paterfamilias TO HOLD AS HIS OWN ANY PROPERTY OR ACQUISITIONS OF ONE
UNDER HIS POWER. (Black4)

—=—

!967
 —=—

“CHILDREN ARE ALWAYS PRESUMED TO BE LEGITIMATE, FOR

FILIATION CANNOT BE PROVED.”
ÑSemper praesumitur pro legitimatione puerorem, et Þliatio non potest probari. Co. Litt. 126. See 1 Bouv. Inst. 26  n. 303. (Black4)

—=—

“One may relinquish FOR HIMSELF AND HIS HEIRS a right which
was introduced FOR HIS OWN BENEFIT.”
ÑPOTEST QUIS RENUNCIARE PRO SE ET SUIS JURI QUOD PRO SE IMTRODUCTUM EST. Bract. 20. (Black4)

—=—

This very important maxim is yet another corruption of scriptural principal, meaning that any right
that is copied in simulation from that of being inalienable and self-evident to being merely a
contractive legal beneÞt of personhood can be sold or relinquished by the man in agency. And this
is exactly what happens when we deliver our issue to the dead hands of the state, taking the effect
of the foundation of law and destroying it. In other words, by delivering our children to the state
we are relinquishing our right for that birth to be lawfully recognized in blood relations, and so the
corruption of blood kills such equitable considerations. And yet the law admits that such legal
nonsense is purely a fraud, a coveted and sacred (cursed) deceit, designed only to cause the legal
piracy of the apparent rights and lands of blood heirs. Since Þliation, as the afÞliation of son to
mother and father by blood relation, was always said to be unprovable but by these fabled records
of the history of genealogy, the Truly great and hidden mystery is that all children are children of
God, all of them Naturally legitimate. And so only the false belief (love) of that illegitimate and
fabled his-story of lineage can cause such divides among men in class, rank, title, and status. Its
pure bullshit, in other words, no matter how accurate those records might be. Only an evil man
would subject a child to suffering due to his lack of provable blood lineage and Ògood parentage.Ó
This is as anti-scriptural and antichrist as we can get. And its origin is of course based on the old
testament Jews, who to this day rely on their blood for admission to their purely secular ÒstateÓ
and status. There is no actual conversion to become a ÒJew,Ó for the ßattering title is only assigned
by fabled genealogy. The blood of christ (GodÕs Word/Law), however, is potentially within us all.
We are born into Nature with It. This is the New Testament.

Unfortunately, with the modern advent of blood, gene, and DNA testing, that which was
unprovable (negative) has become vulgarly provable (positive) through modern Òscience.Ó And
while this technology (art) is hailed as a wondrous new frontier, in fact it only solidiÞes the
Þctional, fallacious rationality that only some of us are the Òchosen people,Ó for our DNA
apparently proves this as truth. This grand delusion of exclusionary posterity is now reinforced
with the ultimate lieÉ the worst kind of lie in fact, as one based on actual Truth.

FILIATION - The RELATION of parent and child, BUT DOES NOT IMPORT
LEGITIMACY, although often A STEP TO THAT END. Correlative to “PATERNITY." THE
JUDICIAL ASSIGNMENT OF AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD TO A DESIGNATED MAN AS
ITS FATHER. In the civil law, the DESCENT of son or daughter, with regard to his or her
father, mother, and their ancestors. (Black4)

FILIATE - TO FIX A BASTARD CHILD ON SOME ONE, AS ITS FATHER. TO DECLARE

WHOSE CHILD IT IS. (Black4)

FILIOLUS (or FILIOUS) - In old records, a godson. (Black4)

!968
 FILIUS - Latin. A son; a child. As DISTINGUISHED FROM HEIR, Þlius (SON) is a TERM
OF NATURE, haeres (HEIR) a TERM OF LAW. In the civil law the term was used to denote a
child generally. A distinction was sometimes made, in the civil law, between "Þlii" and "liberi;"
the latter (liberi) word including grandchildren, (nepotes), the former (Þlii) not. But,
according to Paulus and Julianus, they were of equally extensive import. (Black4)

FILIUS FAMILIAS - In the civil law, the SON OF A FAMILY; an UN-EMANCIPATED son.
(Black4)

FILIUS NULLIUS - An illegitimate child; SON OF NOBODY. (Black4)

FILIUS POPULI - A SON OF THE PEOPLE. Natural child. (Black4)

—=—

To be clear, when speaking of the status (person) of any man, we always must establish that status
with a describing word. “Person” is an ambiguous term, and so it cannot stand at bar alone with-
out signs and marks any more than a christian (Þrst) name alone can have standing. We must add a
description of the nature of that term of civil law. And so we would say private person or public
person. Thus when the man is considered by or in law, the nature of his person is discernible, and
the way that man is treated depends on the nature of his person (status). The law only recognizes
man’s status (person), not man in and as himself (by his blood). The private man may use only his
christian name. The public person will answer to a surname. In this way, the description of public
need not be used, for the status is manifested by the expression of consent in answer to that
registered and conÞrmed surname admixed with the christian name. The last (higher) name
establishes jurisdiction by canceling out the moral, Higher Law presumed by use of the christian
(Þrst) name alone. The contractual relationship is established at bar by this appearance in
admixture of names.

The surname establishes the presumptive fact of paternity in that the person appearing has the
public status of Þlius nullius (illegitimate), and consent to being publicly Þlius populi (a son of the
state/People). This is how we appear in court, and how the court sees our children. For we have
lost our Nature and replaced It with an artiÞcial, legalistic nature, as that of a Þction of law called
as a “natural” child; a Hu-man; an animal; one acting without soul or with tainted blood. He who
is not of God’s Nature but in the nature of the state… this duality of words reigns supreme in the
matrix of legal simulation.

—=—

“SON is a name of nature, but HEIR is a name of law.”

ÑFILIUS EST NOMEN NATURAE, SED HAERES NOMEN JURIS. 1 Sid. 193. 1 Pow.Dev. 311. (Black4)

—=—

“A son in the mother's womb is part of the mother's VITALS.”

ÑFILIUS IN UTERO MATRIS EST PARS VISCERUM MATRIS. 7 Coke, 8. (Black4)

—=—

“FILIATION CANNOT BE PROVED; that is, the husband is presumed

to be the father of a child born during coverture.”
ÑFILIATIO NON POTEST PROBARI. Co.Litt. 126. But see 7 & 8 Vict. c. 101. (Black4)

—=—

!969
To place oneÕs child into the artiÞcial matrix (protective womb) of the state, to call the state as father,
is to give up oneÕs vital connection (blood) to that child. We sell that vitality, represented by worded
vital statistics, in exchange for rights and protections from the state, which in turn require
subjection to that father-Þgure as the state.

Modern DNA testing techniques may have changed the vulgar consideration of this maxim, but its
principle power remains. In essence, the child has his motherÕs vitals but is born with his fatherÕs
status. A bastard though, as a child with no paternal (authoritative) claim by its father as delivered
(abandoned), continues only in the maternal (nurturing) status of his mother, which leaves the state
to act with paternal power in lieu of the actual, biological father. It is in this small window of time,
after the coverture and expulsion from the womb until the baby leaves the hospital that the vital
statistics are taxed (recorded and registered) and the districted legal entity is created. This is the
secondary, legal de-livery into the legal matrix (artiÞcial womb), taking place only after the actual,
Natural birth from the motherÕs womb.

COVERTURE - noun - 1. Covering; shelter; defense. 2. In law, the state of a married woman,
who is considered as UNDER COVER, OR THE POWER OF HER HUSBAND, and therefore
called a feme-covert, or femme-couvert. The coverture of a woman disables her from making
contracts to the prejudice of herself or her husband, WITHOUT HIS ALLOWANCE OR
CONFIRMATION. (Webs1828)

BARON ET FEME - Man and woman: HUSBAND AND WIFE. A wife being under the
protection and inßuence of her baron, lord, or husband, is styled a "feme-covert" (faemina viro
cooperta), and her state of marriage is called her “coverture." (Black4)

FEME; or FEMME - French. A woman; a wife. Feme is the older form: L. femella, femina, a
young woman. Plural, femes, femmes. Feme covert, or feme-covert. A married woman. BY
MARRIAGE, HUSBAND AND WIFE ARE ONE PERSON IN LAW. UNDER HIS
PROTECTION AND ''COVER," SHE DOES EVERYTHING; and is therefore called in law-
French a feme-covert; while her condition is called “coverture.Ó (WCA1889)

FILIATION PROCEEDING - A special statutory proceeding, CRIMINAL IN FORM, but in

the nature of A CIVIL ACTION TO ENFORCE A CIVIL OBLIGATION OR DUTY
SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING PARENTAGE AND THE
PUTATIVE FATHER'S DUTY TO SUPPORT HIS ILLEGITIMATE CHILD. (Black4)

HERITAGE - noun - 1. INHERITANCE; an estate that PASSES FROM AN ANCESTOR TO

AN HEIR BY DESCENT OR COURSE OF LAW; that which is inherited. In Scot's law, it
sometimes signiÞes immovable estate, in distinction from movable. 2. In Scripture, the saints
or PEOPLE OF GOD ARE CALLED HIS HERITAGE AS BEING CLAIMED BY HIM, and
the objects of his special care. 1 Peter 5:3. (Webs1828)

MANCIPIUM - Latin. In Roman law, the momentary condition in which a Þlius, etc., might be
when in course of emancipation from the potestas, and before that emancipation was
absolutely complete. The condition was not like the dominica potestas over slaves, but slaves
are frequently called "mancipia" in the nonlegal Roman authors. To form a clear conception
of the true import of the word in the Roman jurisprudence, it is necessary to advert to the
four distinct powers which were exercised by the pater familias, viz.: the manus, or martial
power; the mancipium, resulting from the mancipatio, or alienatio per aes et libram of a freeman;
the dominica potestas, THE POWER OF THE MASTER OVER HIS SLAVES, and the patria
potestas, THE PATERNAL POWER. When the pater familias SOLD HIS SON, venum dare,
mancipare, the paternal power was succeeded by the mancipium, or the power acquired by
the PURCHASER over the PERSON whom he held in mancipio, and whose condition was
assimilated to that of a slave. What is most remarkable is, that on the emancipation from the
mancipium HE FELL BACK INTO THE PATERNAL POWER, which was not entirely

!970
exhausted until he had been sold three times by the pater familias. Si pater Þlium ter venum dat,
Þzzus a patre Ziber esto. Gaius speaks of the mancipatio as imagmaria quedam venditio, because in
his times it was only resorted to for the purpose of ADOPTION or EMANCIPATION.
(Black4)

MANCIPARE - Latin. In Roman law, TO SELL, ALIENATE, OR MAKE OVER TO

ANOTHER; to sell with certain FORMALITIES; TO SELL A PERSON; one of the forms
observed IN THE PROCESS OF EMANCIPATION. (Black4)

MANCIPATE - TO ENSLAVE; TO BIND; TO TIE. (Black4)

EMANCIPATE - adjective - Set at LIBERTY. (Webs1828)

PRAEMIUM EMANCIPATIONIS - In Roman law. A reward or compensation anciently

allowed to a father on emancipating his child, consisting of one-third of the child's separate
and individual property, not derived from the father himself. (Black4)

MANCIPATIO - Latin. In Roman law, a certain ceremony or formal process anciently

required to be performed, to perfect the sale or conveyance of res mancipi, (land, houses,
slaves, horses, or cattle.) The parties were present (vendor and vendee), with Þve witnesses
and a person called "libripens," who held a balance or SCALES. A SET FORM OF WORDS
was repeated on either side, indicative of TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP, and certain
prescribed gestures made, and the vendee then struck the scales with a piece of copper,
thereby SYMBOLIZING THE PAYMENT, or WEIGHING OUT, of the stipulated price. The
ceremony of mancipatio was used, in later times, in one of the forms OF MAKING A WILL.
The testator acted as vendor, and the HEIR (or familiae emptor) AS PURCHASER. THE
LATTER SYMBOLICALLY BUYING THE WHOLE ESTATE OR SUCCESSION, OF THE
FORMER. The ceremony was also USED BY A FATHER IN MAKING A FICTITIOUS SALE
OF HIS SON, which sale, when three times repeated, EFFECTUATED THE
EMANCIPATION OF THE SON. (Black4)

MANCIPI RES - Latin. In Roman law, certain CLASSES OF THINGS WHICH COULD
NOT BE ALIENED OR TRANSFERRED EXCEPT by means of a certain FORMAL
CEREMONY OF CONVEYANCE called “mancipatio.” These included land, houses, slaves,
horses, and cattle. All other things were called "res nec mancipi.” THE DISTINCTION WAS
ABOLISHED BY JUSTINIAN. The distinction corresponded as nearly as may be to the
early distinction of ENGLISH LAW INTO REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY: res mancipi
being objects of a military or agricultural character, and res nec mancipi being ALL OTHER
SUBJECTS OF PROPERTY. Like personal estate, res nec mancipi were not originally either
valuable in se or valued. (Black4)

MANCEPS - Latin. In Roman law, A PURCHASER; one who took the ARTICLE sold in his
hand; a formality observed in certain sales. A farmer of the PUBLIC taxes. (Black4)

MANUMISSION - The act of liberating a slave from bondage and giving him FREEDOM.
In a wider sense, releasing or DELIVERING ONE PERSON FROM THE POWER OR
CONTROL OF ANOTHER. (Black4)

—=—

“To manumit is the same as to place beyond hand and power.”

ÑMANUMITTERE IDEM EST QUOD EXTRA MANUM VEL POTESTATEM PONERE. Co. Litt. 137. (Black4)

—=—

!971
As was declared by Horace Greeley in reference to the 14th amendment citizen-ship status that all
common issues are delivered into at birth, each becoming natural children (a child of the people),
the release of the black slaves from forced bondage as an act of emancipation was merely the setting
of them at a political liberty without tangible chains. It was the placing of them into the open-air
prison or gaol (district), and was in actuality the equalizing of all common citizenships, including
all “white persons” that are made to be ignorant of their right of blood inheritance by relation to
the constituted “Posterity,” as so diminished to that common level of political but not True Liberty
in Nature. A person (status) was assigned to each man, representing the bondage of artiÞcially
districted (seized) “freedom” not dissimilar to that which a branded cow has within the white
picket fences of a farmerÕs ranch, the Þctional persona or personality (legal status) being used as
identiÞcation, as that of a brand burnt into the ßesh of the cow to mark it as property. This is the
political system representing a tacit simulation of liberty. This is the same act that all common,
public persons do as they abandon (set free) their child to be found in and seized by the district. In
other words, emancipation was merely the creation of voluntary slavery and servitude through
word trickery to replace the old system of involuntary slavery and servitude. It was the forced
purchase (eminent domain) of all bound slaves by the state (district) in public ofÞce, where in turn
they were set free (placed into a public, commercial franchise called as a citizen-ship). Equalization
made all men free to be slaves of their own vocational choosing in permissive employment (being
used in mammon). This is the legal, artiÞcial, virtual version of a controlled freedom and liberty
(enfranchisement), which can only exist in legal, public personhood (property), and only within the
borders of the governed land in nativity. It is the ultimate deception, for a free slave is a prosperous
slave. And so it is that this number one catchphrase of patriotically public persons captured freely
in US citizenship, whom actually believe they are part of that sovereignty that reigns over them
and for which they pledge their allegiance to, is to proclaim and sing fervently that, “I’m proud to
be an American, where at least I know I’m free.” It’s a cosmic joke; a mis-transliteration based on
ignorance of Romanization and the concept of franchise and its gaol (district). It’s the magic of dog-
Latin. For only by their blood and by refusal of publicity in citizenship would they be able to make
such a claim of blood inheritance and constitutional protections.

—=—

“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is

violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as BEING SELF-EVIDENT.”
—Arthur Schopenhauer

—=—

How many “patriots,” as those that falsely believe they are free, will ridicule this work alone in that
Þrst stage of denial? How many will violently oppose it as cognitive dissonance swirls like mad-
ness in their brains? Alas, the author fears that the number that will see this work as self-evident
must surely be the lesser of these three stages, for who can imagine that the love of Truth is so
vastly different and more painful than that comfortable belief and artful legal life expressed in the
accepted lies of Þction?

ILLEGITIMATE - THAT WHICH IS CONTRARY TO LAW; it is usually applied to children

born out of lawful wedlock. A BASTARD IS SOMETIMES CALLED AN ILLEGITIMATE
CHILD. (Bouv1856)

ILLEGAL - CONTRARY TO LAW; UNLAWFUL. 2. It is a general rule, that THE LAW WILL
NEVER GIVE ITS AID TO A PARTY WHO HAS ENTERED INTO AN ILLEGAL
CONTRACT, whether the same be in direct violation of a statute, against public policy, or
opposed to public morals… NOR TO A CONTRACT WHICH IS FRAUDULENT, WHICH
AFFECTS THE DEFENDANT OR A THIRD PERSON… (Bouv1856)

—=—

!972
Let’s face it, revealing that entire generations of US citizens are actually illegitimate bastards under
falsiÞed legal marriage contracts between Þctional persons designed to cause that illegitimacy and
be adopted by the state in voluntary servitude is not easily excepted by all of us bastards out here,
we whom are falsely living in an imaginary self-aggrandize of our captured Selves. And so the
author sympathizes with the many deeply ingrained fallacies imposed by the public sphere that
may be preventing the enlightenment of that third stage of Truth‘s acceptance from being attained
very easily. For the author though, these self-evident Truths are now just second nature, after over a
decade of striving to Þnd answers that I too didnÕt want to hear. Ego is a very powerful obstacle.

But on the bright side, we must never forget that this is all Þction. Only the God of Nature knows
Truth, and only under GodÕs Law is that opinion of the Þctional state destroyed as it applies to us
individually. Remember, legal marriage is artiÞcial, and so is legal Þction. Christ was a ÒbastardÓ in
law too, but his path out of that nativity and accident of birth are the epitome and purpose of those
scriptural teachings. To follow His path is to attain the only True spiritual Legitimacy possible, and
that means so much more than the custom of attending a Þctional ceremony every Sunday in a
corporate, Romanized ÒChristianÓ church. As is written, all men should strive to be the sons of
God, for no man is ever a bastard in the Reality of Nature, which is GodÕs Realm and no other.
ArtiÞcial things can only be proven in the artiÞcial legal realm of man, but such titles and pre-
tended statuses in Þction have no respect of the God of Nature.

NEXT - Nearest; closest; immediately following. Nearest or nighest, not in the sense of
propinquity alone, as, for example, three persons on three chairs, one in the midst, those on
each side of the middle one are equally near, each "next" to the middle one; but it signiÞes also
order, or succession, or relation as well as propinquity. (Black4)

NEXT OF KIN - A wife, by afÞnity, or BY BLOOD, like a parent, sibling, or offspring is a

deceased's nearest relative. (Black2)

NEXT OF KIN - In the law of descent and distribution, this term properly denotes the
persons nearest of kindred to the decedent, that is, those who are most nearly related to him
by blood; but it is sometimes construed to mean ONLY THOSE WHO ARE ENTITLED TO
TAKE UNDER THE STATUTE OF DISTRIBUTIONS, and sometimes to include other
persons. The words "next of kin," used simpliciter in a deed or will, mean, not nearest of
kindred, but those relatives who share in the estate according to the statute of distributions,
including those claiming per stirpes or BY REPRESENTATION. (Black4)

SIMPLICITER - Latin. Simply; without ceremony; in a summary manner. Directly;

immediately; as distinguished from inferentially or indirectly. By itself; by its own force; per
se. (Black4)

NEXT DEVISEE - Person to whom remainder is GIVEN BY WILL. (Black4)

NEXT EVENTUAL ESTATE - Estate taking effect UPON HAPPENING OF THE EVENT
TERMINATING ACCUMULATION. (Black4)

NEXT PRESENTATION - In the law of advowsons, the right of next presentation is the right
to present to the Þrst vacancy of a beneÞce. (Black4)

KINDRED - Relatives BY BLOOD. ÒKindred of the whole blood, preferred to kindred of

the half blood.Ó (Black2)

AFFINITY - At common law. Relationship BY MARRIAGE between the husband and the
blood relations of the wife, and between the wife and the blood relations of the husband.
AfÞnity is distinguished into three kinds: (1) DIRECT, or that subsisting between the husband
and his wife's relations by blood, or between the wife and the husband's relations BY
BLOOD; (2) SECONDARY, or that which subsists between the husband and his wife's

!973
relations BY MARRIAGE; (3) COLLATERAL, or that which subsists between the husband
and the relations of his wife's relations. In the civil law. The connection which arises by
marriage between each PERSON of the married pair and the kindred of the other. (Black2)

CHILD - This word has two meanings in law: (1) In the law of the domestic relations, and as
to descent and DISTRIBUTION, it is used strictly as the correlative of "parent," and means a
son or daughter considered as IN RELATION with the father or mother. (2) In the law of
negligence, and in laws for the protection of children, etc., it is used as the opposite of
"adult," and means the young of the HUMAN SPECIES, (generally under the age of
puberty), WITHOUT ANY REFERENCE TO PARENTAGE and without distinction of sex.
(Black2)

ADOPTED CHILD - The child who is NOT THE NATURAL CHILD OF THE PARENTS but
has become a TRUE child by legal action. Can be considered a legal heir. (Black2)

LEGALLY ADOPTED - The term used to signify that a child has been adopted in accordance
with the state laws. (Black2)

ADOPTION AND LEGITIMATION - Adoption, properly speaking, refers only to

PERSONS WHO ARE STRANGERS IN BLOOD, and is not synonymous with
"legitimation," which refers to PERSONS OF THE SAME BLOOD. Where one
acknowledges his illegitimate child and takes it into his family and treats it as if it were
legitimate, it is not properly an “adoption” but a “legitimation.” TO ACCEPT AN ALIEN
AS A CITIZEN OR MEMBER OF A COMMUNITY OR STATE AND INVEST HIM WITH
CORRESPONDING RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES, either (in general and untechnical
parlance) BY NATURALIZATION, or by an act equivalent to naturalization, as where a
white man is "adopted" by an Indian tribe. (Black2)

ADOPTION - The act of one WHO TAKES ANOTHER'S CHILD INTO HIS OWN FAMILY,
treating him as his own, and giving him all the RIGHTS AND DUTIES of his own child. A
JURIDICAL ACT CREATING BETWEEN TWO PERSONS CERTAIN RELATIONS,
PURELY CIVIL, OF PATERNITY AND FILIATION. (Black2)

FILIATION - The relation of a child to its parent: correlative to “PATERNITY.” The

JUDICIAL ASSIGNMENT OF AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD TO A DESIGNATED MAN AS
ITS FATHER. In the civil law. The DESCENT of son or daughter, with regard to his or her
father, mother, and their ancestors. …but does not import legitimacy, although often a step to
that end. Correlative to "paternity." (Black2, Black4)

LEGITIMATION - The MAKING LEGITIMATE OR LAWFUL THAT WHICH WAS NOT

ORIGINALLY SO; especially the act of LEGALIZING THE STATUS OF A BASTARD.
(Black2)

BASTARD - An illegitimate child; a child born of an unlawful intercourse, and while its
parents are not united in marriage. A child born after marriage, but under circumstances
which render it impossible that the husband of his mother can be his father. One begotten
and born OUT OF LAWFUL WEDLOCK. ONE BORN OF AN ILLICIT UNION. A bastard is
a child born out of wedlock, and whose parents do not subsequently intermarry, or a child
THE ISSUE OF ADULTEROUS INTERCOURSE of the wife during wedlock. (Black2)

BASTARDIZE - TO DECLARE ONE A BASTARD, AS A COURT DOES. TO GIVE

EVIDENCE TO PROVE ONE A BASTARD. A mother (married) cannot bastardize her child.
(Black2)

—=—

!974
It is again important to note that these legal statutes of proclaimed legitimacy and bastardization
are not terms of Nature. In other words, they do not just happen in Nature, but are purely
considerations of manÕs law and Þctional language arts in contract. This is most important to
consider due to the fact that all of these states of existence (artiÞcial being) must be declared or are
presumed. They are forced, not Naturally occurring. They are not simple. And modernly this
requires the original instrument and form (matrix) of birth certiÞcation or naturalization. Nothing
happens without action. This is to say that the act in Nature of having a child does not
automatically mean that the law presumes this to be your own child. Instead, the presumption of
paternity is based upon the status of the parent. Under manÕs artiÞcial law, a slave cannot give
birth to a free man any more than a free man may bear a slave. Likewise, a citizen of the United
States is presumed by the marriage contract (a contract between the husband, wife, and with the
state in dominative authority) to be in agree-ment (a consenting state of mind) that the product of
that marriage contract (a child in Þctional persona) is issued as property of the state Ñ the product
of that contractual, commercial incorporation of names.

As the contracting agents in marriage are bound to know the law that governs that legal marriage
and citizenship in commerce, the following applies. For a status (person) is merely a commercial
product, a bill of goods sold to foolish consumers with insurable protections that require subjection
to the law of the person as purchased.

PRODUCT ADOPTION PROCESS - The mental process that every potential customer goes
through from the awareness of a product to its rejection or becoming loyal CUSTOMERS.
(1) Awareness: The potential customers come to know about the product but lack the
necessary information on it, (2) Interest: They try and search for information on it, (3)
Evaluation: They weigh its pros and cons, (4) Trial: They PURCHASE it for the Þrst time to
determine its utility and quality, (5) Adoption/rejection: THEY DECIDE TO CONTINUE
USING IT OR REJECT IT COMPLETELY. (Black2)

Ñ=Ñ

This is the perfect description of the use of money. This process is also the very nature of the
citizen-ship. We can only weigh the pros and cons of citizenship and the birth process according to
the awareness we garner from our interest level on learning the true nature of this legal compact.
Citizenship is always a state of trial (probation), for we are purchased (conquered) as long as we
utilize that contractual state of artiÞcial, political status, and we live in a state of adoption as we
continue acting our lives out under the legal construct of citizenship, incorporating our given
(christian) Þrst name with the state surname or last name. And so we agree to allow the state’s
name to overcome our christian name, as the secular overcoming the spiritual, the Þction over
Reality, granting authority to the state and its legal laws over that of the Natural Law of that which
rules First and as the Origin of Source (as God-given), the Þrst name.

The word last has a special meaning in law, one that all men bearing its load should be aware of:

LAST - In old English law, signiÞes A BURDEN; also a measure of weight used for certain
commodities of the bulkier sort. (Black2)

LAST - adjective - Latest; ULTIMATE; FINAL; most recent. (Black4)

Ñ=Ñ

The commercial carrying of the surname, as the burden or ÒlastÓ name supra to our Þrst (gift from
God) name, as the unalienable christian name, causes us to become beasts of burden. It signiÞes the
purchase (conquering) in contractual relationship of the man (as in the singular christian or Þrst
name) by that god of mammon, and is thus a mark of ultimate, original sin against God and
Nature. To put it simply, it is to place the name of evil (mammon) over the name of good (God).

!975
 —=—

“A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches, and loving favour
rather than silver and gold.”
—Proverbs 22:1, KJB

—=—

“Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by that which ye are called?”
—James 2:7, KJB

—=—

“Lest ye CORRUPT YOURSELVES, and make you a graven image, THE

SIMILITUDE OF ANY FIGURE, the likeness of MALE OR FEMALE.”
—Deuteronomy 4:16, KJB

—=—

“But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw
you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that WORTHY
NAME by the which ye are called?”
—James 2: 6-7, KJB

—=—

The attachment and use of a surname adjoined to the christian name in law, especially in the form
of a sig-nature, represents an act of expression against God and Nature and Its Law as an express
consent that is a token and sign of the last record of will of that man to act in the sin of artiÞciality
and personhood. For the last name serves only commerce, only mammon, only similitude. It is of
the utmost importance for the reader to comprehend this fact in law, which is to say that our
appearance and operation under this combination of good and evil, of Reality and Þction, and of
Nature and artiÞce by name (proper noun) seals our fate. The attachment of that last (higher in
law) name is proof of legal existence, proof of commercial intent, and proof of our positive under-
standing to that international code of the idolatrous gods of the nations. It is the destruction of Self,
of self-evidence. Remember, our under-standing comes not from knowledge but from our actions.
Under-standing in legalese is a contracted dis-ease, a binding chain to those Þctional, constituted
authorities. It is the last name that is Þrst considered and ofÞcially written, for it is the last evidence
of intent, consent, will, and testament. To have an admixed name is a sign of consent to the law of
that artiÞce which created it.

—=—

ÒIf two conßicting provisions are found in a will, the LAST is

observed.”
—SI DUO IN TESTAMENTO PUGNANTIA REPERIENTUR, ULTIMUM EST RATUM. Lofft 251. (Black4)

—=—

!976
The last name (surname) conßicts with the Þrst name (christian name), two opposing forces in an
eternal struggle for manÕs mind, body, and soul. For the surname was the last thing added to manÕs
personiÞed legal will, a sign of intent by the informing mother and father. Thus the legal state only
observes by its principals of law the last sign and mark of manÕs will, which is manifest by his
claim and use of the surname (last evidence of will). The surname is like a badge of unholy desire.

We are bastardized through our apparently legalized second birth away from Nature into the legal
Þction, into simulated life. And only the separation as a quitclaim and voiding of that attachment
and incorporation of Þrst name and surname as the last (intentional higher status) name can cause
a regeneration back into our Natural state of Being as part of GodÕs Creation. We must express our
will by negatively opposing legal Þction, by ceasing to use or participate in the artiÞciality of legal
things and concepts. We must not show signs, use tokens, or speak in or of the authority of that
illiterate language of Latinized paganism. We must mean what we say. We must never speak falsely
nor speak through Þctional mediums. We must never seek proof of that which is artiÞcial, and we
must never have need to prove who or what we in self-evident Reality are in our own Being. We
must be in the Truth of our own self-evidence and self-Existence and that of Nature at all times,
never deviating from our under-standing of God. But most of all, we must never feel secure, never
safe or sure, and always be on defense of our own principals against the principalities of corrupt
men. Nothing in Nature is this way, for nothing in Nature relies on anything but Nature Itself for
its survival and well-being. In other words, we must look only to God for protection by having
faith only in Reality and never in the lies we might tell each other and to ourselves. Our religion
must be only the very self-evident meaning of Truth, as the meaning of our very own Nature
within Reality.

Again, your mental belief in some false religious image and personiÞcation of ÒGodÓ is not a
requirement to under-stand that this is how the legal law operates against Nature. But you must
know that the legal law itself, that which is a horriÞcally militarized force of jurisdiction that has
killed 100s of millions of men throughout history to forward its own Þctional and Þnancial cause
and course will not recognize you as anything but one of two things: either an enslaved legal
person or as a religious man acting in love (be-lief) under GodÕs Law alone without actual threat to
its commercial intent.

—=—

“If those are better who are led by love, those are the GREATER
NUMBER who are CORRECTED BY FEAR.”
—SI MELIORES SUNT QUOS DUCIT AMOR, PLURES SUNT QUOS CORRIGIT TIMOR. Co. Litt. 392. (Black4)

—=—

To acknowledge publicly that there is no God is only ever to declare that the state thus has the right
to be the tyrannical god it strives to be, as no higher power or Law Exists in and over the mind,
body and soul of the unregenerate, unenlightened man. The author admits to the reader that this
was indeed one of the most difÞcult concepts to accept in my own understandings, and yet this is
so obviously a self-evident truth and deÞnitely the most important understanding of all law. The
gods must separate man from his Nature, from his actual Creator, in order to usurp that
metaphorical throne in artiÞce as the legal creator of his false personiÞcation of self. This is the
same temptation offered to christ. This work is not attempting to tell you what is your own
perception of Reality, only to tell you the functionality and purpose of that Þctional, legal state and
how it operates to keep you its ignorant slave. We are only deconstructing the simulation. And to
do so, we must know that which is opposed to all simulated things. Light and dark; Good and evil.
There is no simulation without Þrst there being an original, though eventually man can be
convinced to worship the simulacrum, which is a simulation of that which has no original. For we
have all eaten that fruit and now must choose how we digest and act with such knowledge.


!977
Some take this as only a religious instead of as a True and spiritual concept. Some may ignore this
enlightenment because they arrogantly believe that True religion is false and therefore the
scriptures are false. And yet no matter what your background or system of belief, there can be no
denial of the self-evident Truth, reason, and logic of these concepts. For they are not the author’s
opinions, but the very backbone of the principals of all forms of law, corruptible only by man’s
degradation into falsehoods and Þctions.

And from these scriptural lessons and understandings we may begin to comprehend the
foundation of corruption in both church and state. For their conspiratorial combinations have
always been and always shall exist side-by-side, one not able to exist without the other’s
justiÞcation. All sovereigns, all tyrants, all masters, and all priests need subjects to rule over. And to
rule over man, his spiritual Nature must be destroyed so that his political, social nature can be
manipulated and exploited. And from this degradation, no recovery can be made within that
system of sin. A public person will always be just that. Only voiding out the combination and
admixture of names will change the presumed status of the man’s persona. The bad must be
exorcized from the good, for the status of the public surname will never be anything but one of
voluntary servitude to the magistrates of that system of mammon.

—=—

“Whatever is once bad, is presumed to be so ALWAYS in the same

degree.”
—Semel malus semper praesumitur esse malus in eodem genere. Cro 19  Car. 317. (Black4)

—=—

The ridiculous Hollywood version in entertainment of what exorcism is in actuality shows again
how manipulated we are through the imagery of technology (art). For demonology is merely the
art of the evil genius (devilry) and designs of man through various magic spells in the artful
languages. But the truth about Þction is always so much stranger, for the power and authority of
the devil only attaches itself to man through his voluntary oath and contract to it, the covenant of
evil (artiÞce). The surname is that which turns the spirit of man towards evil, as if possessed by a
demon, where he follows in person-hood only the path and law of the false creator of that which it
lies and exists in rent.

The church and state tricks man into the legal ceremony of exorcism from Nature, which is merely
the act of pledging one's oath to those Þctional corporations so that man may be saved from his
True Nature by the false-hood of legalism. An oath to church and state is an oath to oppose God
and Nature. For these legal and ecclesiastical institutions consider man in his Natural state of Being
under God and without their false legal permission to live in their personiÞcation and membership
to be as an apostasy to themselves, a crime against the nature of those legalistic gods in Þction. We
must therefore be exorcised from Nature and from Nature’s God by being adjured into the legal
realm by oath and fealty. We must be made as mortal in the shadow of those corporate ofÞces of the
immortal priests and politicians. We must pledge our allegiance to the cursed Òholy nameÓ of
popes, kings, and all lesser magistrates in Order to be saved from our Natural Selves, and so that
we may in a dead pledge live and subsist within the granted Þctional persona of the gods and their
iniquitous system of mammon. We must become demonically controlled and summonable sureties
for their property.

The legalistic, ecclesiastical ceremony of exorcism is not to rid the demon (person) from controlling
the man, but to rid man’s moral Nature and Law from controlling the state’s demon (person).
Exorcism is the acceptance of the Þction over the Reality, to except the metaphor as a virtual reality
without realization of the actual Reality in Nature it metaphorically points to. It is the ceremonial
destruction of manÕs soul, and the replacing of it with the artiÞce of legal and false-religious

!978
persona, for the moral soul of man is uncontrollable without that demonic possession of the re-
created persona (status) of the state being artfully intermixed within the mind. Exorcism is to
adjure, not to abjure.

To AD-JURE means to enter into the legal realm and system of law of the church and state.

To AB-JURE means to separate one's Self from that realm and legal system of law.

To AD-JURE is to become a member of a Þctional religion and/or a government.

To AB-JURE is to become a True religious man without respect or attachment to any such artiÞce.
Abjuration is only ever the path away from government and legalized corporate religion and into
the Natural Realm of God. For no man will be allowed to Live without either NatureÕs Law or the
enfranchisement of personhood (legal law). Again, one must always have a God, and those who
make no choice are swept up in the legal realm, often without a clue they are in it voluntarily.

EXORCISE - verb intransitive - s as z. [Gr. TO ADJURE, TO BIND BY OATH, AN OATH.] 1.

To adjure by some HOLY NAME; but chießy, to expel evil spirits by CONJURATIONS,
prayers and ceremonies. To exorcise a PERSON, is to expel from him the EVIL SPIRIT
supposed to POSSESS him. To exorcise a demon or evil spirit, is to cast him out or drive him
from a person, by prayers or other ceremonies. 2. To purify from unclean spirits by
adjurations and ceremonies; TO DELIVER FROM THE INFLUENCE of malignant spirits or
demons; as, to exorcise a bed or a house. (Webs1828)

EXORCISM - noun - [Latin exorcismus.] The expulsion of EVIL SPIRITS from PERSONS OR
PLACES by certain ADJURATIONS and CEREMONIES. Exorcism was COMMON
AMONG THE JEWS, and still makes a part of the SUPERSTITIONS of some churches.
(Webs1828)

EXORCISER - noun - One who PRETENDS to cast out evil spirits BY ADJURATIONS AND
CONJURATION. (Webs1828)

ADJURATION - noun - 1. The act of adjuring; a SOLEMN CHARGING ON OATH, or under

the penalty of A CURSE. 2. The FORM of oath. (Webs1828)

ABJURATION - noun - [See Abjure.] 1. The act of abjuring; a renunciation upon oath; as 'AN
ABJURATION OF THE REALM,' by which a person swears to leave the country, and never
to return. It is used also for the oath of renunciation. Formerly in England, felons, taking
refuge in a church, and confessing their guilt, could not be arrested and tried, but might
save their lives by abjuring the realm; that is BY TAKING AN OATH TO QUIT THE
KINGDOM FOREVER. 2. A rejection or denial with solemnity; a total abandonment; as ‘an
abjuration of heresy.Õ (Webs1828)

SOLEMNITY - noun - 1. A rite or ceremony annually performed with religious reverence.

Great was the cause; our old solemnities from no blind zeal or fond tradition rise, but sav'd
from death, our Arguves yearly pay these grateful honors to the god of day. [Solemnities
seems here to include the sense of anniversary. See the fourth line. But in modern usage, that
sense is rarely or never attached to the word.] 2. A religious ceremony; A RITUAL
PERFORMANCE attended with religious reverence; as the solemnity of a funeral or of a
SACRAMENT (OATH). 3. A ceremony adapted to impress awe; as the solemnities of the last
day. 4. Manner of acting awfully serious. With horrible solemnity he caused every thing to be
prepared for his triumph of victory. 5. Gravity; steady seriousness; as the solemnity of the
Spanish language. 6. Affected gravity. SOLEMNITY'S A COVER FOR A SOT (AN
INFATUATED OR STUPID PERSON). (Webs1828)

!979
 EXERCISE - noun - s as z. [Latin exercitium, from exerceo; Eng. work.] In a general sense, any
kind of work, labor or exertion of body. Hence, 1. USE; PRACTICE; the exertions and
movements customary in the performance of business; as the exercise of an ART, TRADE,
occupation, or profession. 2. Practice; PERFORMANCE; AS THE EXERCISE OF RELIGION.
3. USE; EMPLOYMENT; exertion; as the exercise of the eyes or of the senses, or of any
power of body or mind. 4. Exertion of the body, as conducive to health; action; motion, by
labor, walking, riding, or other exertion. The wise for cure on exercise depend. 5. Exertion of
the body for amusement, or for instruction; the habitual use of the limbs for acquiring an
ART, dexterity, or grace, as in fencing, dancing, riding; or the exertion of the muscles for
invigorating the body. 6. Exertion of the body and mind or faculties for improvement, as in
oratory, in painting or statuary. 7. Use or practice to acquire skill; preparatory practice.
Military exercises consist in using arms, in motions, marches and evolutions. Naval exercise
consists in the use or management of artillery, and in the evolutions of ßeets. 8. Exertion of the
mind; application of the mental powers. 9. Task; THAT WHICH IS APPOINTED FOR ONE
TO PERFORM. 10. ACT OF DIVINE WORSHIP. 11. A lesson or example for practice. - verb
transitive - [Latin exerceo.] 1. In a general sense, to move; to exert; TO CAUSE TO ACT, in any
manner; as, to exercise the body or the hands; to exercise the mind, the powers of the mind,
the reason or judgment. 2. To use; to exert; as, TO EXERCISE AUTHORITY OR POWER. 3.
To use for improvement in skill; as, to exercise arms. 4. To exert one's powers or strength; TO
PRACTICE HABITUALLY; as, to exercise one's self in speaking or music. 5. To practice; TO
PERFORM THE DUTIES OF; AS, TO EXERCISE AN OFFICE. 6. To train to use; to
discipline; TO CAUSE TO PERFORM CERTAIN ACTS, as preparatory to service; as, to
exercise troops. 7. To task; to keep employed; to use efforts. HEREIN DO I EXERCISE
MYSELF, TO HAVE ALWAYS A CONSCIENCE VOID OF OFFENSE TOWARDS GOD
AND MEN. Acts 24:16. 8. To use; to employ. 9. To busy; to keep busy in action, exertion or
employment. 10. TO PAIN OR AFFLICT; to give anxiety to; to make uneasy. - verb
intransitive - To use action or exertion; as, to exercise for health or amusement. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is only when we take seriously with solemnity the legal Þction as our virtual reality that we lose
ourselves within its artiÞce and illusion. And we only exercise this Þctional persona for two
reasons, ignorance or knowing corruption. Either way, to do this we must abandon our God and
Nature.

It is only the person of man, the employment status, that causes man to act habitually in artiÞce
(art) and in religious ceremonies that have nothing to do with the spiritual Nature of God or of man
as and in his Eternal Existence and part of the Oneness of Creation. We Þctionally exercise the
franchise of personhood, and so we must be Naturally exorcized to be rid of that demonic
possession of state property.

We must abjure the realm, not by leaving the physical land that we call by name (noun) the
country, state, or nation, but by departing Þguratively from the contractual state of jurisdiction and
respect that name implies under oath. We must stop believing in the unreal. We must Þnd the land
and ground ourselves by quitting the watery graven image of the commercial sea. We must
embrace Reality by extinguishing the Þction from our minds. We must reclaim the power of the
blood and spirit. But let us be clear, the legal Þction will only be thwarted through spiritual means,
and it only recognizes True religion as that which it cannot effect or respect. The devil that is the
state can only cling to its own legal persona, which man voluntarily contracts in surety to his soul.
And so only a religious man, a man of God following in the footsteps and example of christ’s
teachings, may throw off in exorcism and abjuration that legal demonic possession. Only by
ceasing to exercise the franchise of public citizen-ship can that demon be expelled.

No corporate, priest as corporate agent (employee) of the pope (antichrist) is needed…

!980
 —=—

“Exile is a PRIVATION of country, A CHANGE OF NATAL SOIL, A

LOSS OF NATIVE LAWS.”
—Exilium est patriea privatio, natalis soli mutatio, legum nativarum amissio. 7 Coke, 20. (Black1)

—=—

But if the reader chooses to believe in Hollywood’s metaphorical, propagandist version of its artful
imaginations and imagery of demons and exorcism in collusion with that Romish church and state,
the author certainly cannot control your mind as government and the entertainment industry can.
But know this… as we proceed, we will discover that werewolves, vampires, and most other
mythological creatures and stories of man’s imagination also have their origins only in the legal
Þction (this will be covered in Volume II). Reality, the Natural world, is our only goal, that which
we must seek to realize without artiÞce and fear of imaginary things and church-created monsters.
Belief in these Þctions is no different from belief in the realness and legitimacy of government.

We are often left to foolishly wonder, as we gaze with utter amazement and disbelief upon the
present corruption of our legally created politicians, why government does not charge itself with
conspiracy? But under reasonable scrutiny and without fallacious and patriotic beliefs in the
legitimacy of this entity called “government,” the answer is quite clear. Government is the very
foundation of conspiracy. Governments are always created out of conspiracy; a combination or
plan between two or more people to control others through injury and thus beneÞt only a few by
design. Remember, to injure means to bring into and under man’s law, and the favorite tool of
injury is to cause man to conÞrm and ratify his bond and surety to a citizen-ship, which brings him
into and under the agentic law of the principal creator of that legal persona.

CONSPIRACY - Criminal law, TORTS. An agreement between two or more persons to do an

unlawful act, or AN ACT WHICH MAY BECOME BY THE COMBINATION INJURIOUS
TO OTHERS… (Bouv1856)

CONFEDERACY - Criminal law. An agreement between two or more persons to do an

unlawful act, or an act, which though not unlawful in itself, BECOMES SO BY THE
CONFEDERACY. The technical term usually employed to signify this offense, is
CONSPIRACY. (Bouv1856)

INJURY - Civil law, in the technical sense of the term it is a delict committed in contempt, or
outrage of any one, whereby his body, his DIGNITY, or his REPUTATION, is maliciously
injured. 2. Injuries may be divided into two classes. With reference to the MEANS used by
the wrong doer, namely, by WORDS and by ACTS. The Þrst are called VERBAL injuries,
the latter REAL… A wrong or TORT. Injuries are divided into PUBLIC and PRIVATE; and
they affect the PERSON, PERSONAL PROPERTY, OR REAL PROPERTY. (Bouv1856)

INJURIOUS - adjective - [Latin injurius.] 1. Wrongful; unjust; HURTFUL TO THE RIGHTS

OF ANOTHER. THAT WHICH IMPAIRS RIGHTS OR PREVENTS THE ENJOYMENT OF
THEM, is injurious. 2. Hurtful to the person or health. Violence is injurious to the person, as
intemperance is to the health. 3. AFFECTING WITH DAMAGE OR LOSS. INDOLENCE IS
INJURIOUS TO PROPERTY. 4. Mischievous; hurtful; AS THE INJURIOUS
CONSEQUENCES OF SIN OR FOLLY. 5. LESSENING OR TARNISHING REPUTATION.
The very suspicion of cowardice is injurious to a soldier's character. 6. Detractory;
contumelious (reproachful and contemptuous); hurting reputation; as, obscure hints as well as
open detraction, are sometimes injurious to reputation. 7. In general, whatever gives pain to
the body OR MIND, WHATEVER IMPAIRS OR DESTROYS PROPERTY OR RIGHTS,

!981
 WHATEVER TARNISHES REPUTATION, WHATEVER DISTURBS HAPPINESS,
WHATEVER RETARDS PROSPERITY OR DEFEATS THE SUCCESS OF A GOOD CAUSE,
is deemed injurious. (Webs1828)

—=—

What is indolence and why is it injurious to property? Understand this, and you understand the
True price of Natural Freedom (verb) in action under God (verb), compared to inaction (verb) as
the resulting danger of political security (noun) and monetary protection (noun) of the church
(noun) and state (noun) in opposition to God’s Nature (verb). The corporate “Christian” in his
secular ofÞce and membership is indolent in his worship, for his actions do not match his words,
and his habits are idle compared to his spiritual course. He has no grace because his actions are not
done in the glory of God’s Nature and Law, but in the pursuit of mammon and satisfaction of his
principal (false god).

INDOLENCE - noun - [Latin indolentia; in and doleo, to be pained.] 1. Literally, freedom from
pain. 2. Habitual idleness; indisposition to labor; laziness; INACTION OR WANT OF
EXERTION OF BODY OR MIND, PROCEEDING FROM LOVE OF EASE OR AVERSION
TO TOIL. Indolence like laziness, implies A CONSTITUTIONAL OR HABITUAL LOVE OF
EASE; idleness does not. (Webs1828)

—=—

Indolence is the difference between a militia man and a man legally protected by a centralized
“federal” military. One has calloused hands while the other’s remain soft and easily torn. One
Þghts for his own freedom like a wolf and the other is merely a domesticated, four-footed animal
content to be fed and fooled by his spewing dog-Latin, free to roam within borders and laws
selected by others.

Darkness is much easier than Light, ignorance easier than knowledge, evil easier than Good, Þction
easier than Reality, political slavery easier than Natural Freedom, and satan (the lie) easier than
God (the Truth). This is why ease is considered a sin. In other words, indolence is easier than the
efforts, labor, pains, and toils of moral rectitude in Natural Freedom. It is far easier to be bound to
the legal law in contracted franchise and with the monetary protections of voluntary slavery with-
out even knowing what that law says than to contemplate, apply, and follow the unwritten moral
Law without any false protections in absolute responsibility for our own actions in all things. Ease
is at best an inducement to sin, and the cities appear devilishly to provide ease from Nature’s
hardships. And so we continuously lie to ourselves and except the Þctions and monetary,
temporary insurances of mammon that pretend to exist all around us, a matrix of utter self-deceit.
And man seems to unconsciously seek that which is easiest, despite whether or not it is right,
including the enslavement of other men in mammon’s valuation of money and interest. If you
havenÕt Þgured it out yet, Living under God is Living right, which is to say that Living consciously
is what a Truly religious (adjective) man does, without the false burden of bearing the title
(denomination) some false religion (noun) and its doctrine as a Þction of legal (anti-God) law. And
though that path is never the easy one, it is the one with the least regrets and the most spiritual
rewards. For in the end, man only has his soul, his spiritual substance, even as his body betrays
him and the synapses of his mind fail. What use is Þction then? What use are the prizes of the sea
when the body is Þnally placed into the dirt? And what good will these churches built by the hands
of men serve but to trick the next generations of men, including your own children, into taking the
false doctrines of church and state?

You might say that the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution of the United States (or the
constitution of any nation as a Þctional incorporation) were the original in-juries to all common
men without bloodline consideration within their proclaimed legal jurisdictions; the original
(ancestral) sin against God and Nature. These were the original conspiracies to exorcise and
contractually in-jure (bring under legal law) men as Þctional persons under oath (sacrament) into

!982
an ordained corporation called “government.” In other words, the national, federal government
was created (constituted as a plan between several but not all speciÞc People) to bring into a legal
standing the artiÞcial persons of other men through bondage, incorporating their ÒprivateÓ
characters and reputations into Þctional ÒpublicÓ personas, so that man could be instead
considered as Þctional characters (creations) of government under the bond of surety. In this way
man, through such a Þctional, proprietary id-entity, could be ruled via the administration of that
Þction of law, the person, by and through the pretended impersonation of magistrates (creator
gods) that as agents govern over their own Þctional creation (legal jurisdiction). This is akin to
satan tricking man into contractually entering hell by doing his deeds in Life rather than Living for
admittance into heaven. The state forces men to do its bidding by conning man to voluntarily
contract with it in a person-hood. While this may go against the identity crisis of that traditional
pat-riot-ism of the typical ÒcitizenÓ of the United States or elsewhere, Reality is much different from
what that belief system portrays. This work is of course designed to uncover just what a citizen is
juxtaposed to the lie that is sold to men acting in that citizenry.

And we must not forget that the Bible, as an unwritten part of the common law, is there for a
purpose. It is there as a guidepost, a disclaimer if you will, which warns against all that the state
has to offer in its contracts and district. It is the moral law that stands in juxtaposition to the secular
establishment of legalism. It is as well considered as an unwritten part of the common law because
without it, man loses his access to the common and spiritual law when he excepts that which is
contractually opposed to and warned against in the Bible. In other words, you have no excuse but
ignorance of scriptures (Law), and ignorance of even the Highest Law is certainly no excuse.

And this brings us to the artful word tort. The question is not so much what a tort is but rather who
may claim it? Who or what may actually be tortiously harmed? Encyclopedia Britannica explains
this notion of what exactly is a tort. Pay close attention to the last sentence in this deÞnition:

“Tort, in common law, civil law, and the vast majority of legal systems that derive from
them, any instance of harmful behaviour, such as physical attack on one’s PERSON,
INTERFERENCE WITH ONE’S POSSESSIONS, OR THE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF
ONE’S LAND, economic interests (under certain conditions), HONOUR, REPUTATION, and
PRIVACY. The term derives from Latin tortum, meaning “something twisted, wrung, or
crooked.” THE CONCEPT ENCOMPASSES ONLY THOSE CIVIL WRONGS
INDEPENDENT OF CONTRACTS.”

—=—

It is very important to note that public persons have no ability to claim actual tort damages in any
constitutional or other lawful way, except that which is strictly expressed or tacitly presumed by
the external, tacit contract of personhood. The contractual relationship destroys all others, and a US
citizenship is therefore never under common law. The contract kills equitable and common law
considerations and destroys spiritual ones. Contracts are the surrendering of general rights in
acceptance of special (in species/class) legal ones. And one certainly cannot harm (cause tort to) the
privacy of an already public (published) persona!

—=—

“In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf

of the court, the very provision of the Fourteenth Amendment now in
question, said: "The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be
natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that."
And he proceeded to resort to the common law as an aid in the
construction of this provision. 21 Wall. 167.”


!983
“In Smith v. Alabama, Mr. Justice Matthews, delivering the judgment of
the court, said: "THERE IS NO COMMON LAW OF THE UNITED
STATES, IN THE SENSE OF A NATIONAL CUSTOMARY LAW,
DISTINCT FROM THE COMMON LAW OF ENGLAND AS
ADOPTED BY THE SEVERAL STATES EACH FOR ITSELF, APPLIED
AS ITS LOCAL LAW, and subject to such alteration as may be provided
BY ITS OWN STATUTES… There is, however, one clear exception to
the statement that THERE IS NO NATIONAL COMMON LAW. The
interpretation of the Constitution of the United States is necessarily
inßuenced by the fact that ITS PROVISIONS ARE FRAMED IN THE
LANGUAGE OF THE ENGLISH COMMON LAW, AND ARE TO BE
READ IN THE LIGHT OF ITS HISTORY." 124 U.S. 478.”
—UNITED STATES v. WONG KIM ARK, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

—=—
In other words, you know nothing about the US constitution unless you know the entirety of
English common law and its history, which of course stems from Roman law. And this is why most
“patriots” are laughed out of the courtroom when they attempt to invoke the constitution in a
purely non-constitutional, administrative, commercial court. For they know not the nature of the
syn (person) they are appearing as.

—=—

“[T]he Constitution REQUIRES NOT FOLLOWING THE DICTATES

OF THE DOCUMENT BUT WORKING OUT, OVER TIME, A
COMPLEX BALANCE AMONG INSTITUTIONAL INTERESTS. THAT
IS HOW WE DO CONSTITUTIONAL LAW… [I]T IS NEVER
ACCEPTABLE TO ANNOUNCE THAT YOU ARE IGNORING THE
TEXT.”
—David A. Strauss, The Supreme Court, 2014 Term — Foreword: Does the Constitution Mean What It Says?, 129 Harv. L. Rev. 1, 61 (2015); id. at 4.

—=—

The devil only operates and has inßuence via contract, and man can only be harmed by these legal
devils when he contracts with them. This cannot be understated, for the contractual relationship
prevents the Law of God as Natural Law and also any constitutional law from negatively
protecting the contracted party. No tort exists under the contract of citizenship, except those
deÞned by the tortuous creators of that contract. An evil man (devil) will never punish his own evil
actions. This is to say that, because the person (legal status) is property of government, the man in
surety to the person has no right to declare that a tort was committed against his person. He is not
acting in privacy, and so his projected self-image cannot be harmed.

Instead, government offers what is called as remedy, which is a fee paid to justify an act of harm,
usually after the harm is already done and in Reality unrepairable. When we are harmed through
our strawman, dis-ease caused by such harm and injury is generally contracted only upon that
Þctional persona, not our actual (private) Self. And so a false cure, a remedy, may be attained in
certain cases. But this is not a tort. Essentially, we are merely talking about accepting money as a

!984
valuation of the crimes and evils committed against us, while the evil-doer’s go free without
punishment. This is remedy, and it is what every attorney strives to attain for its clients. Remedy,
very importantly, is not a solution. Throwing money at legal organizations and Þctional, political
associations as reparations for slavery is an example of remedy, as the paying off of mischiefs and
evils committed by valuing them in monetary form, a shameful sham of a practice, even as the
bloodline posterity of those constitutionally protected land and slave holders of old continue today
in private, sovereign power and authority over the money supply and over the persons of the
lineage of those former slaves! Nothing has changed, except that all common men became the
slaves of government instead of belonging to the private landholders.

To the corrupt man, money remedies all dis-ease even as the symptoms ßourish.

REMEDY - noun - [Latin remedium; re and medeor, to heal.] 1. That which CURES A DISEASE;
any medicine or application which puts an end to disease and restores health; with for; as a
remedy for the gout. 2. That which counteracts an evil of any kind; with for, to or against;
usually with for. CIVIL GOVERNMENT IS THE REMEDY FOR THE EVILS OF NATURAL
LIBERTY. What remedy can be provided for extravagance in dress? The man who shall
invent an effectual remedy for intemperance, will deserve every thing from his fellow men.
3. THAT WHICH CURES UNEASINESS. Our griefs how swift, our remedies how slow. 4.
That which REPAIRS loss or disaster; REPARATION. IN THE DEATH OF A MAN THERE
IS NO REMEDY. - verb transitive - 1. To cure; to heal; as, to remedy a disease. 2. To cure; TO
REMOVE, AS AN EVIL; as, to remedy grief; to remedy the evils of a war. 3. To repair; TO
REMOVE MISCHIEF; in a very general sense. (Webs1828)

—=—

When we cure meat with salt, that is, meat that is already dead, we do not fool ourselves into think-
ing we are providing Life-afÞrming remedy or a cure for disease, but rather are seeking only to
preserve and prolong the already dead state of being so that we may continue to devour that dead
thing for a longer period of time. Well, I’m sorry to inform you, but citizenships are also considered
as spiritually dead animals whose diseases are cured similarly, but with money as that remedy.
After all, money makes the world go round. Hopefully by now we can recognize what is the Real
world and what is the Þgurative, monetized one.

This notion that civil government is the remedy or cure for the evils of Natural Liberty, as the civil
government of the public-minded, unregenerate, spiritually dead goyim, is one of the most
profound statements I have come across. It is a True statement in every sense of the word. For to a
slave-master, to a devil, and commercially speaking, the notion of free men under God’s Word
(Son) is the purest of evil, especially to those of the Talmudic law. Natural Liberty can only be
obtained under the scriptural teachings and no other way. For even the private People of the
several (private) States are not Naturally Free, relying on this corrupt system to control all others
civilly and militarily in commerce so as to protect the false sovereignty of their own private legal
status. For these men are not acting morally or under the Higher Law of God. Instead, they created
this legal system to bypass that Law of Nature and establish themselves as a constituted magistracy
and body politic of idolatrous gods, having no law higher than their own corruption. And so as
long as our collective fear lies in these landlords instead of the Lord of All Things, we will be
governed by such civil means and we will continue to fall victim to the manufactured consent and
empty remedies to the serial crimes committed by these most corrupted of men.

So let us be clear here that the constitution is a compact in covenant, which is just another word for
contract. We speak of covenant law both in the ecclesiastical and civil law. But from what root does
this word actually stem from? The answer is surprising, especially to those fooled by the notion of
the supposed “spiritual” covenant law within national constitutions, as if spirituality can be found
in any form of the legal words of a contract.

!985
There is a reason that witches and thieves form covens, and it is the same reason that lawyers,
politicians, industrialists, and jurists do as well; the same reason those so-called “founding fathers”
formed the speciÞc covenant law of the United States. It is only to break all other laws by creating
an unnatural realm and jurisdiction that excuses such fraud by the anarchy of permissive license
(organized chaos), an honor system among thieves. To avoid punishment for oneÕs own crimes, one
merely need constitute oneself as a sovereign god and pretend to be untouchable while forging a
false history (his story) in the romantic glory of artiÞce for those who would worship your artful
greatness and lawlessness.

COVENANTED - participle passive - PLEDGED or promised by covenant. (Webs1828)

COVENOUS, COVINOUS - adjective - [See COVIN.] COLLUSIVE; FRAUDULENT;

DECEITFUL; as a covenous lease of LANDS. (Webs1828)

COVINOUS - adjective - Deceitful; collusive; fraudulent. (Webs1828)

COVIN - noun - In law, a collusive or deceitful AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO OR MORE

TO PREJUDICE A THIRD PERSON. (Webs1828)

COVENANT - noun - [L, to come; a coming together; a meeting or agreement of minds.] 1. A

mutual CONSENT or agreement OF TWO OR MORE PERSONS, to do or to forbear some
act or thing; A CONTRACT; stipulation. A COVENANT IS CREATED BY DEED IN
WRITING, SEALED AND EXECUTED; OR IT MAY BE IMPLIED IN THE CONTRACT. 2.
A WRITING CONTAINING THE TERMS OF AGREEMENT OR CONTRACT BETWEEN
PARTIES; or the CLAUSE of agreement in a deed containing the covenant. 3. In theology, the
covenant of works, is that implied in the commands, prohibitions, and promises of God; the
promise of God to man, that man’s perfect obedience should entitle him to happiness. This
do, and live; that do, and die. The covenant of redemption, is the mutual agreement between
the Father and Son, respecting the redemption of sinners by Christ. The covenant of grace, is
that by which God engages to bestow salvation on man, UPON THE CONDITION THAT
MAN SHALL BELIEVE IN CHRIST AND YIELD OBEDIENCE TO THE TERMS OF THE
GOSPEL. 4. In church affairs, a solemn agreement between the MEMBERS of a church, that
they will walk together according to the precepts of the gospel, in brotherly affection. - verb
intransitive - To enter into a formal agreement; to stipulate; TO BIND ONE’S SELF BY
CONTRACT. A covenants with B TO CONVEY TO HIM A CERTAIN ESTATE. When the
terms are expressed it has for before the thing or price. They covenanted with him for thirty
pieces of silver. Matthew 26:15. - verb transitive - To grant or promise by covenant. (Webs1828)

—=—

Remember, a conspiracy is an agreement or coming together of minds between two or more

persons to do some act, speciÞcally as a covenant to harm, injure, or exclude other persons. This is
merely the deÞnition of the word covenant, and a constitution is merely a legal covenant. It was the
Bible that said love thy neighbor, love no foolish oaths, and to beware of combinations of men
(conspiracies). But it is the corporate denomination of the Christian church that often says love only
thy brother, only the other members of the corporation, and excommunicate without love all
others, even our own family, our own sons, daughters, or parents. Freemasonry is built upon this
tenet of Òbrotherly love,Ó but this false love (belief) is only a form of protectionism that says do not
rat out your fellow masonic members in their commission of crimes. In christ, there is no
brotherhood, there is only all of man. To love one's enemy is the Higher love. But to any member,
any artiÞcial brother, all outsiders are the enemy. To the Jew, the enemy is all those not Jewish by
blood, the goyim, and are to be enslaved to serve the Jew according to Talmudic civil law. A nation
is built speciÞcally upon the intention of injuring and thus harming the rights of all others not
inclusive of the original covenant and its bloodline posterity. This cannot be dismissed by any
reasonable man in due diligence, and certainly not by a spiritual one.

!986
We must also be able to discern between the dualistic forms of the “gospel” as presented by the
corporate church. Secular, organized religions will only ever promote their own doctrines, for their
existence is against the very gospel of christ. There is the gospel of christ and there is the gospel of
church and state. Which one we follow deÞnes the state of our soul, our spiritual and moral Being,
and thus our Law.

GOSPEL - noun - [Latin evangelium, a good or joyful message.] The history of the birth, life,
actions, death, resurrection, ascension and doctrines of Jesus Christ; OR A REVELATION
OF THE GRACE OF GOD TO FALLEN MAN THROUGH A MEDIATOR, including the
character, actions, and doctrines of Christ, WITH THE WHOLE SCHEME OF SALVATION,
as revealed by Christ and his apostles. This gospel is said to have been preached to Abraham,
by the promise, 'in thee shall all NATIONS be blessed.' Galatians 3:8. It is called the gospel
of God. Romans 1:1. It is called the gospel of Christ. Romans 1:16. It is called the gospel of
salvation. Ephesians 1:13… - verb transitive - To instruct in the gospel; OR TO FILL WITH
SENTIMENTS OF RELIGION.

1. GOD'S WORD.
2. Divinity; theology.
3. ANY GENERAL DOCTRINE. (Webs1828)

—=—

Nothing in the teachings of christ was a blessing on any nation. Nothing in the Bible states that the
God of Nature blesses nations. Only men acting as gods, as kings in christ’s and therefore God’s
stead blesses nations in the name of God. Here again, this statement might offend the patriotic
mind, but itÕs only a self-evident Truth. Nature and Þction are opposed. Nature is the blessing of
God. And so it is ridiculous to contemplate that God would bless anything but Its own Creation.
There is no nation in the world that does not claim to be blessed by God. And yet there is no nation
in the world that follows God’s Law. Nations are legal creations, following only the legal law of
their own creation, as generally added to the law of Rome. They are created only in opposition to
God and Natural Law. And yet each ÒpeopleÓ identiÞes as GodÕs chosen ones. This is at the very
least oxymoronic, and at worst completely insane.

Are the differences between the gospel of christ and the doctrines of religion clear? Even the
scriptures warn of the conspiracy of the religions and their non-prophets, who seek to draw men
into their covens and membership contracts for fraudulent purposes and to teach their own
doctrines against that of the True words of christ.

—=—

“THERE IS A CONSPIRACY OF HER PROPHETS in the midst thereof,

like a roaring lion ravening the prey; THEY HAVE DEVOURED
SOULS; they have taken the treasure and precious things; they have
made her many widows in the midst thereof.”
—Ezekiel 22: 25, KJB

—=—

There is one moral question that the reader must ask him or her Self. How exactly did these men
originally obtain the land that it supposedly then granted and conveyed through its self-
proclaimed constitutional authority to do so? Did history magically re-start? Was the world re-
created by these legal gods in 1776? Ultimately, there are only two answers, that of the deceits of
conquering by bloodshed and commercial money transfer for purchase. Either form was only that
of blood-money used to conquer that which is God’s Nature and resell it to the fools who worship
in their own conceit.

!987
We must remember that once men join together in conspiracy (confederation), then those men can
commit no conspiracy except among themselves and against that system of government that they
have created, but never to or against those fools who voluntarily subject themselves to it. To subject
oneself to a government is to subject oneself to a conspiracy, and thus is an act of express consent to
accept that no conspiracy or fraud legally exists. It is make-believe; as legalized (art forced into)
Truth. Honor among legal thieves. The confederation (conspiracy) cannot commit a separate con-
spiracy against that which is not a party to the original combination in covenant, especially those of
us who voluntarily participate and subject ourselves under the authority of that conspiracy. We
have no right to complain about the usual course of business (happiness) in commerce if we are
acting as commercial property (willing slaves) of that commercial conspiracy in persona. We either
leave it in abandonment or we go along with its game of monopoly. We have free will. We are free
to individually choose. Yet we are under the illusion of these word-magicians that we have no Real
choice, for the magical Þction has pulled mammon's wool of person-hood over our eyes to blind us.
We equate money (remedy) to True Freedom, forgetting that God’s Natural Realm is the only
salvation (solution), the only Truth.

Whatever fantasy you may have about the constitution being a spiritual covenant, I assure you that
you are sadly mistaken. Paper is never spiritual; not this work, not the Bible, and certainly not the
constitution of the United States. Spirituality is a result of actions, not a grouping of words.
Spirituality is only what happens in Nature, as that which happens inside of man and is then
expressed and manifested through his actions, that is the only spirituality. All else is only Þction,
parable, fable, words, law, and most often deceit. Mention of christ is certainly nowhere to be found
within any national constitution and certainly not in this one, nor is any aspect of the Natural Law
of God secured. The US constitution is nothing more or less than a blueprint for a pirate and witch
coven built for commercial purposes, where spells of word-magic are cast in the legal craft causing
men to abandon all spirituality in their pursuits of mammon. It is certainly correct to say that
constitutions are of covenant law, but now you know the Reality about what any other covenant is
outside of God’s Grace, outside of Natural Law. For any other covenant can only ever be exclusive,
created for the purposes of commerce, which is opposed to the covenant of Grace. No oaths
(pledges), only vows (promises to God). To be absolutely clear, a legal covenant can only consist of
two or more men conspiring against others, or at least in exclusion of all others so as to beneÞt by
their indenture. It can serve no other purpose, for without such exclusion there would be no need
to constitute the covenant despite scripture.

A sovereignty must have its subjects, or there can be no purpose in that sovereignty. A new, legal
covenant between all living men in the world would be pointless, for all men would necessarily be
included and none excluded. The Bible is the only legitimate covenant, including all men in its
potentiality, for the only way that this Higher, moral Law may manifest is through man's own
actions in conscious duty to his fellow man. Thus, the Bible is a Purely negative covenant, and such
Grace of God may only be attained by the learned and just moral man who abandons his positively
permitted, legally licensed heathen ways. With nothing lower, there would be nothing higher, and
so the word sovereignty would be a pointless redundancy. The very fact that legal “sovereignty”
exists in the United States and other nations and states necessarily requires there to be a lower class
of subjects to that sovereignty. Again, this is merely a self-evident conclusion of reason. God’s
covenant of Grace is the only one that fulÞlls that promise, that all men should be blessed by their
covenant with God’s Nature and Law, and be duty bound to respect that Truth of Nature. The US
constitution, as a covenant (covin) between only legally considered “white persons” of a certain
blood-line, has nothing of God’s spiritual Realm about it. It originated as only a covenant of
security in support of slavery, commerce, taxation, and monetary gains over those not of the
posterity, including slaves, indentures, domestics, and commoners. And so you must ask yourself,
what does it really mean to be a “constitutionalist,” when in fact public persons are constituted as
debtors under that compact? In Reality, celebrating patriotically and defending to the death that
which contractually enslaves you to a performance debt in abandonment of God’s law… is that not
akin to devil worship?

!988
The ofÞcers of government are agents (employees) acting under ßattery in the agency of their
corporate principal government employer. Their actions as hirelings, prostitutes, and mercenaries
are generally protected and pensioned by their principal under the color of title and ofÞce in
contract and insurance. This is again called conspiracy or confederation, a simulation of security by
money and violence, and the injuries caused by these agents are thus pretended to be justiÞed
under color of law and color of title under color of ofÞce and by monetary compensation and
insurance. The problem is, all citizen-ships are also agents of that principal government;
employees; ofÞcers. Even the proudest of slaves will agenticly lash out against his fellow slaves to
protect his limited shelter and protections Ñ his Òpursuit of happinessÓ under his slave-master.

No king would ever accuse himself of a plan against himself, nor would he charge those under him
with conspiracy for a plan put into place with the design of beneÞting that kingdom (corporation),
even at the expense (injury/tort) of all men in persona (mask) under that government. The purpose
of government is plainly and easily explained as a conspiracy against its voluntarily contracted or
militarily conquered subjects for the beneÞt of its creators (the People that created/constituted the
government corporation as signatories for themselves and their Posterity). A kingdom, national, or
state government is absolutely no different from any other form of commercial corporation created
to beneÞt its CEO and stake-holders. This is again an obvious, self-evident Truth.

By comprehending that the constituted government (created by the supposed bloodline of People)
acts as a single body politic god over its own patented Þctional words, then we can see why men
acting as gods in government would claim it as evil to impede manÕs Þctional law in government,
calling it as a conspiracy. ÒGod,Ó whether it be Jehovah or as a legal title of magistrates or of the
ecclesiastical ranks, is always good. And that which opposes any form of ÒgodÓ is always evil. Thus
the One True God is evil to these secondary legal gods. These are merely terms of art, stolen from
Nature and repurposed by evil men for their own good. Money is good to them, for they are its
creator, and money is the foundation of the contractual debt laid upon their subjects in mammon.
The constitution is meaningless to public persons in this regard, for the act of a citizen-ship
impeding even the most corrupt government function (whether it be constitutional or
unconstitutional) is the same as a slave attempting to impede his masterÕs crop or other production
capacity. He will bleed the Real red blood he supposedly has no legal capacity to hold for his efforts
against his master.

In law, while standing in front of these gods of Þction at bar and in the ofÞce and jurisdictional
authority of their legal agency, we appear as the image or form of something other than what we
Truly are; as artiÞcial (dead) creations of manÕs legal law (of the gods) known as ÒÞctions of law.Ó
In persona (mask), our actions are not our own nor guided by our own moral Good, but instead are
done through agency as Þctional persons of the state and its law, not our own. If our morals are told
to us by amorally governing religious institutions, then we can ourselves lay no claim as the Source
(Self) of our own moral behavior or being. In fact, incredibly, our moral actions are quite illegal
under the law of man without permission (license) to act upon them. Morals are legally redeÞned
to beneÞt the pursuits of the legal gods. This is why churches are incorporated under permissive,
legal, contractual federal laws, for a church without incorporation under the state as its supreme
authority instead of God would be illegal and thus uncontrollable by the state. The state cannot
control the Creation and Property of God, only its own false re-creation, that which is built by
hands and words. True Religion belongs to God, while secular, corporate religions can only belong
and worship to the state and pay tribute to it in mammon.

In the realm and art of a Þctional court of legal law, we are literally invisible without Þrst
identifying ourselves as the name of a legally registered, dead ÒpersonaÓ Ñ the full, admixed name
of a strawman.

To comprehend what the word illegal means in this case, we must deÞne similar terms.

INFORMAL - adjective - [in and formal.] Not in the regular or usual form; as an informal
writing; informal proceedings. 1. Not in the usual manner; NOT ACCORDING TO
CUSTOM; as an informal visit. 2. NOT WITH THE OFFICIAL FORMS; as the secretary made
to the envoy an informal communication. (Webs1828)

!989
 INFORMAL - DeÞcient in legal form; INARTIFICIALLY DRAWN UP. (Black1)

INFORMALITY - WANT OF LEGAL FORM. (Black1)

INFORMALITY - noun - [from informal.] Want of REGULAR or CUSTOMARY form. THE

INFORMALITY OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS MAY RENDER THEM VOID. (Webs1828)

FORMA - Latin. Form; formality; CHARACTER. Occurs in the phrases in forma pauperis, and
pro forma. (WCA1889)

FORMALITER - IN FORM; formally. (WCA1889)

FORMALITY - ESTABLISHED ORDER OR METHOD, rule of proceeding or

EXPRESSION. Opposed (to) informality. (WCA1889)

FORMAL - BELONGING OR ESSENTIAL TO THE FORM or frame of a thing; NOT OF

THE SUBSTANCE: as, a formal defect or irregularity, A FORMAL PARTY; also, according to
regular method of procedure. OPPOSED (TO) SUBSTANTIAL, REAL. See Demurrer.
(WCA1889)

FORM - 1. ESTABLISHED METHOD OF EXPRESSION OR PRACTICE; A FIXED WAY OF

PROCEEDING. Compare COURSE. 3. The model of an INSTRUMENT OR LEGAL
PROCEEDING; a formula. See Blanks. OPPOSED TO SUBSTANCE. THAT WITHOUT
WHICH THE RIGHT SUFFICIENTLY APPEARS TO THE COURT IS FORM. WHATEVER
IS WANTING OR IMPERFECT, by reason whereof THE RIGHT APPEARS NOT, is a
DEFECT OF SUBSTANCE. Matter of form is whatever relates, not to the purpose or object of
an instrument, or to a right involved in, or affected by it, BUT MERELY TO THE
LANGUAGE OR EXPRESSION, without affecting the issue presented, the evidence
requisite, the right of a party, or a step necessary in furtherance of legal proceedings.
(WCA1889)

INFORMER - A PERSON who informs or prefers AN ACCUSATION AGAINST

ANOTHER, whom he SUSPECTS OF THE VIOLATION of some penal statute… (Black4)

—=—

The mother of the child, at birth, in assuming the ofÞce of and signing as the Òinformer,Ó is
accusing her own child as being a violation of law; of being the product of an adulterous and
illegitimate union without substance (blood), and therefore unwittingly declaring and certifying it
to be formed as such; as a bastard, an abomination before God and country. The child (issue) is thus
no longer in a state of informality. It is given legal capacity in legal form as a legal persona. Its legal
form is constituted by the mother’s in-formation of it into the legal matrix (womb) of the district.

This is the simulation of a blood sacriÞce to the gods of the nation.

A child without a birth certiÞcate is a child without legal form. A spiritual man is informal, Living
without legal form or capacity, without status, without insurance, and generally without a mask. It
is this informality that Þguratively immunizes that child from legal dis-ease and consideration.
With no person (status), no man (surety) can be summoned, for no possession is apparent or
certiÞed. With no surety, no bond under debt can be broken, no artiÞcial chains can be pulled, and
no contractual relation-ship can be said to exist or be legally pirated. No legal injury can occur and
no insurance can be claimed, for no surname exists to insure. No public ad-venture in interstate
(foreign) commerce is established, no principal, and no agent. In other words, there has been no
legal capacity established.

The spiritual, True Religiously (verb) Lawful man is only ever in an informal (i.e., ambiguous) state
of Being, of Pure negative substance in Self-Existence, without artiÞcial (legal) form or member-

!990
ships. The substantial, spiritual man takes no artiÞcial legal form, instead remaining purely a Being
of substance Living only in the Realm of GodÕs Nature (Reality). The spiritual man has no legal
name and no legal status except that of a negative and reserved consideration, standing only in
opposition to any imposed presumption of any vehicle or word magic of positive law. Therefore he
cannot be gravely recognized by the dead things of government, for he has not taken the marks
and signs of the spiritually dead. He has no capacity to carry the dead artiÞces of manÕs law, for he
has been born again into innocence, into the absence of all of manÕs controlling Þctions. The Living
have no place in the legal Þction, just as the spirit repulses that which is unspiritual.

But all of this changes when man takes upon his True and unblemished Self any legal name,
number, or title in surety, and expresses himself in the Þctional disposition and surety of another (a
stranger), bearing its Arms despite oneÕs own blood consideration (family, Þlation). If a man has
taken no legal form, the artiÞcial substance of the legal law cannot attach itself to the man, for the
man has no recognizable person (status) that might attract such an attachment. He is invisible;
incorruptible, intangible, as a ghost in the machine. And itÕs his and only his choice alone to remain
that way, to Be as the remnant in remainder.

Citizen-ship and person-hood (personiÞcation) places the spiritually Living man into such a
Þctional disposition. In other words, his unalienable position under God and within Nature
(Creation) and Its Law is alienated by legal Þction (government), and that contractual relation-ship
establishes the law. This is in-jury; the injuring of man into the legal Þction.

When we break that word apart into its functioning word-DNA parts that make up the whole, we
can comprehend that to in-jure someone or something is to bring it into and under the status
(standing) of the legal realm of law. The law only applies to those in-jured (adjured) under it. Law
only lingers without purpose until an injury is incurred, and only then is the manÕs attached
persona brought forcibly (summoned) into that domain. This is called injury; the state of being
Þctionally contemplated in persona by a magistrate and jury in administrative judgement. Thus a
man and his land or property is legally seized by government. The man takes possession of (uses) a
person (legal status) of the state, acting in the agency thereof (as an agent of the government of the
state) in all his affairs, and so the state taxes his use and gains therein. All his stuff belongs to the
Þctional persona, not to his actual Self, for the person and the law that protects it belong to the
state. Thus, all his commercially (publicly) acquired stuff belongs to the state.

As Bouvier explains, we are injured by the use of the Arms of the United States, as our dignity and
reputation is slandered by our false birth into this Þction and incorporation of its surname with our
Real, God-given (blood-right) Þrst name. We are distinctly, formally, publicly marked, which is an
injury (harm) to our privacy.

INJURY - Civil law. In the technical sense of the term it is a delict committed in contempt, or
outrage of any one, whereby his body, his DIGNITY, or his REPUTATION, is maliciously
injured. 2. Injuries may be divided into two classes. With reference to the means used by the
wrong doer, namely, by WORDS and by ACTS. The Þrst are called verbal injuries, the latter
real. 3. A verbal injury, when directed against a PRIVATE PERSON, consists in the uttering
contumelious (reproachful) words, which tend TO EXPOSE HIS CHARACTER, by making
him little or ridiculous. Where the offensive words are uttered in the beat of a dispute, and
spoken to the person's face, the law does not presume any malicious intention in the utterer,
whose resentment generally subsides with his passion; and yet, even in that case, the truth of
the injurious words seldom absolves entirely from punishment. Where the injurious
expressions have a tendency TO BLACKEN ONE'S MORAL CHARACTER, OR FIX SOME
PARTICULAR GUILT UPON HIM, and are deliberately repeated in different companies, or
banded about in whispers to conÞdants, it then grows up to the crime of slander, agreeably
to the distinction of the ROMAN LAW, de injur. 4. A REAL injury is inßicted by any fact by
which a person's honor or dignity is affected; as striking one with a cane, or even aiming a
blow without striking; spitting in one's face; ASSUMING A COAT OF ARMS, OR ANY
OTHER MARK OF DISTINCTION PROPER TO ANOTHER, etc. The composing and
publishing defamatory libels may be reckoned of this kind. (Bouv1856)

!991
 INJURING - participle present tense - Hurting; damaging; impairing; weakening;
RENDERING WORSE. (Webs1828)

INJURIA - Latin. Injury; wrong; THE PRIVATION OR VIOLATION OF RIGHT. (Black1)

INJURE - To violate the legal right of another or inßict an actionable wrong. To do harm to;
to hurt; damage; impair; to hurt or wound, AS THE PERSON; to impair the soundness of, as
health. As applied to a building, "injure" means to materially impair or destroy any part of the
existing structure. (Black4)

IN - In the law of real estate, this preposition has always been used to denote the fact of
SEISIN, TITLE, or POSSESSION, and apparently serves as an elliptical expression for some
such phrase as "in possession," or as an abbreviation for "intitled" or "invested with title."
Thus, in the old books, a TENANT is said to be "IN BY LEASE OF HIS LESSOR." An elastic
preposition in other cases, expressing relation of presence, EXISTENCE, situation, inclusion,
action, etc.; INCLOSED OR SURROUNDED BY LIMITS, as in a room; also meaning for, in
and about, on, within, etc., according to context. (Black4)

JURE - Latin. By right; in right; BY THE LAW. (Black4)

JURE CIVILI - By the civil law. (Black4)

—=—

By this deÞnition, we can stop wondering what it is to be in a state of independence, remembering

that a declared independence by a government is always artiÞcial (political) and thus only internal,
and that even the conquered nations and cities of that Roman Empire were also politically in-
dependent of the empire that Rome ÒbuiltÓ (i.e., declared existent through lines on maps). The
conquerer seldom alters the existing government of that which it conquers, instead incrementally
destroying it from within due to its dependence, which we call romantically as independence. Do
not be fooled by these terms of art. Legal is opposed to God and Nature. Never forget this Truth,
and donÕt let pat-riot-ism (emotion) defeat your ability to reason.

A legal in-law (in-jure) by marriage contract is a strange concept. It is a violation of Nature (Law),
creating legal connection of that which is not connected in Reality (by blood). And so this is really
an injury, the bringing of two persons into a legal representation and relation-ship by force of law.
ItÕs a false, bloodless joining of Arms. And so we must begin to consider that everything that
happens to us in law as it affects the attached strawman persona, is indeed an injury. Without that
person (status) and the surety bond we are presumed to hold by our use of its surname, no public,
positive law would have the power to injure us (nor summon us) into that legal system. For the
injury only happens to the person, not the man.

If the word in refers to a state being within “fact of seisin, title, or possession,” then again we better
rethink just what it means to be in-dependent. For political independence can then only mean that
we are in a title of dependence, that we are dependent upon the state for our possessions. It should
be obvious by now that a Þction, a Þctional persona (estate), can only exist and subsist (as a
conÞrmed and ratiÞed lie) within the conÞnes of a government or nationÕs jurisdictional borders
(form without substance). And so like a cartoon character, a person cannot be Naturally in-
dependent from the state, for a person is not of Nature. Persons are birthed and incorporated in the
state, never without. There can be only political independence in the political Þction, as a cartoon is
free to roam within its cartoon borders, and a pet rabbit or bird can roam freely within its cage. But
a person or state cannot exist except within its established and ordained borders of franchise
(political freedom), its jurisdictional consideration, just as a cartoon character (person) cannot step
into the Real world, into God’s Nature, for it is not a Creation of God. The cartoon has no choice as
to what its creator attaches to it, as that artiÞcially drawn clothing of legal forms and marks. We are
all in-jured into the legal system via attachment of our Good name to the stateÕs (last) surname in
surety and bondage.

!992
This also explains the functionality and limitations of what are called “independent agencies of
government,Ó including the Post OfÞce, Federal Reserve, Social Security Administration, Securities
and Exchange Commission, etc. To imagine these to be Naturally independent from the United
States, as if they could exist or be created somehow to operate outside of their own creators’ realm
of jurisdiction and somehow obtain a status higher than their legal creator-gods (government), has
been one of the leading and most ridiculously fallacious truths (celebrated lies) in the patriot
mythology and alternative shock jock transmissions. And it allows ÒCongressÓ to blame its own
creation, the central bank, for all the problems that Congress is responsible for. For the central bank
is completely, 100% bound by the laws of the United States, which Congress creates. And so we
Þnd these independent agencies to be merely another form of controlled opposition, dummy corp-
orations created to do the dirty work so that Congress (the principal) can pretend to have clean
hands and pretend to have no control over these independent agencies it created. Imagine that, an
agent without a principal. That’s like cow’s milk without a cow (source). It’s certainly a false sense
of the perception of freedom, which as we now know, is merely a franchise. Citizenships are
politically independent agencies too. But that doesnÕt mean in any way that weÕre somehow Free
under God or not contractually bound by the law of our principal (creator of artiÞce).

Let us look even closer at what it means to be birthed into the nation; to be residential tenants with-
in and forced under this neo-feudal condition. Remember, only the blood in posterity as private
citizens of each State (People) can legitimately (lawfully) hold lands, not public subjects as purely
foreign, commercialized citizen-ships (dwellers) in mere resident usufruct. Only blood-heirs may
claim domiciliary rights to hold land. Here is what happens to most of us renters in tenancy when
our blood is corrupted by legal word trickery and magic; when we are made certiÞably, spiritually
dead by the granting of civil life through our birth and de-livery. For the son follows the status
(person) of his parents, and the blood of our actual forefathers (not the Þctional founders/fathers of
a municipal corporation) were de-livered long ago into this Þctional death and debtorÕs hell.

—=—

“The Constitution of the United States was made not merely for the
generation that then existed, but for posterity — unlimited, undeÞned,
ENDLESS, PERPETUAL POSTERITY.”
—Henry Clay

—=—

But who qualiÞes to be the posterity of those whom then politically existed as We, the private
People?

More importantly, just who or what is excluded?

We, as United States citizenships are not acting in and by the fabled genealogy in posterity of our
Natural blood ties and heraldic Arms, but instead only in a legal, artiÞcial ofÞce. We are not acting
as the posterity or ancestry in blood relations, we are adopted ofÞcers (employees) of the state. We
have lost our Natural Arms in consanguinity of blood relations, and instead we bear the artiÞcial,
legal Arms of the United States (or of the other Þctional nations of goyim), ßying its ßag and
worshiping its Seal (Arms) with every dollar (or other national currency) we spend and every term
of art we speak.

POSTERITY - noun - [Latin posteritas, from posterus, from post, after.] 1. Descendants;
children, children's children, etc., indeÞnitely; the race that proceeds from a progenitor. The
whole HUMAN RACE are the posterity of Adam. 2. In a general sense, SUCCEEDING
GENERATIONS; OPPOSED TO ANCESTORS. To the unhappy that unjustly bleed, Heav'n
gives posterity t' avenge the deed. (Webs1828)

!993
 POSTERITY - Descents. All the descendants of a person IN A DIRECT LINE. (Bouv1856)

DIRECT - Straight forward; NOT COLLATERAL. 2. The direct line of descents for example,
is formed by a series of degrees between persons who descend one from another. (Bouv1856)

DESCENT - HEREDITARY SUCCESSION. Descent is THE TITLE, whereby A PERSON,

upon the death of HIS ANCESTOR, ACQUIRES THE ESTATE OF THE LATTER, AS HIS
HEIR AT LAW: This manner of acquiring title IS DIRECTLY OPPOSED TO THAT OF
PURCHASE. 2. It will be proper to consider, 1. What kind of property descends; and, 2. The
general rules of descent. 3. - §1. All real estate, and all freehold of inheritance in land,
DESCEND TO THE HEIR. And, as being accessory to the land and making a part of the
inheritance, Þxtures, and emblements, and all things annexed to, or connected with the land,
DESCEND WITH IT TO THE HEIR. TERMS FOR YEARS, AND OTHER ESTATES LESS
THAN FREEHOLD, PASS TO THE EXECUTOR, AND ARE NOT SUBJECTS OF
DESCENT. IT IS A RULE AT COMMON LAW THAT NO ONE CAN INHERIT REAL
ESTATE UNLESS HE WAS HEIR TO THE PERSON LAST SEISED. THIS DOES NOT
APPLY AS A GENERAL RULE IN THE UNITED STATES. Vide article Possessio fratris… 12. It
is proper before closing this article, to remind the reader, that IN COMPUTING THE
DEGREES OF CONSANGUINITY, THE CIVIL LAW IS FOLLOWED GENERALLY IN
THIS COUNTRY, except in North Carolina, WHERE THE RULES OF THE COMMON LAW
IN THEIR APPLICATION TO DESCENTS ARE ADOPTED, TO ASCERTAIN THE
DEGREE OF CONSANGUINITY. Vide the articles Branch; Consanguinity; Degree; Line.
(Bouv1856)

ANCESTOR - noun - [Latin antecessor, of ante, before, and cedo, to go.] One from whom a
PERSON descends, either by the father or mother, at any distance of time, in the tenth or
hundredth generation. AN ANCESTOR PRECEDES IN THE ORDER OF NATURE OR
BLOOD; A PREDECESSOR, IN THE ORDER OF OFFICE. (Webs1828)

FOREFATHER - noun - An ancestor; one who PRECEDES another in the line of genealogy,
in any degree; usually in a remote degree. (Webs1828)

PREDECESSOR - noun - [Latin proe and decedo, to depart.] A PERSON who has preceded
another IN THE SAME OFFICE. The king, the president, the judge, or the magistrate,
follows the steps of his predecessor OR HE DOES NOT IMITATE THE EXAMPLE OF HIS
PREDECESSORS. It is DISTINGUISHED FROM ANCESTOR, WHO IS OF THE SAME
BLOOD; but it may perhaps be sometimes used for it. (Webs1828)

PREDECEASE - verb intransitive - [pre and decease.] To die before. (Webs1828)

PREDECEASED - adjective - DEAD BEFORE. (Webs1828)

—=—

Read the above deÞnition of descent carefully. Bouvier is explaining quite plainly that as public
citizenships in a contractual relationship with the foreign United States outside of the common law,
we have no heirs by law. Thus incorporated, nationalized, public persons (Þctional ofÞces as
commercial citizen-ships without the Natural right of successive blood inheritance) fall under the
civil law, and are only ever purchasers under civil, not private law. Public (attainted/corrupted)
persons are measured in the Þctional time domain (life event and death event of legal persona/
contract), not by the Eternity of blood relation (a Naturally, perpetually ongoing family line).
Therefore, we must create an artiÞcial will for the persona we dwell within, for no will (intent) is
recognized by law, and we must appoint an executor to that will to carry out the legal contractual
obligations of that commercial intent. The law simply does not recognize any rightful heirs of
public persons, and so the citizen-ship must declare its manifest and lay its burden of the state’s
property upon its legally birthed child (ship).

!994
As incredible as all of this sounds, even as it is spelled out plainly above, and as only the messenger
of the schema of these evil institutions, this author offers no apologies for these shameful Truths of
the legal artiÞces of evil men (lies made legal as adjudged truths). If you continue to worship them
as your own founding fathers (pretended source of existence) through their posterity in spite of
your True Source (Jehovah), then you deserve exactly what you are in receivership and surety of,
and you deserve to smart (be put in pain) for your belief (love) of Þction as a bond-servant, just as
the scriptures warn. This is considered as ÒGodÕs wrath,Ó but make no mistake, we do it to our-
selves. Jehovah is neutral. And manÕs choices while under the gift of Free Will of God cannot be
blamed on God. We have only our own corrupted Selves to blame, for we know self-evidently the
Law of our own Nature.

BOND - That which binds; ANY INSTRUMENT IN WRITING THAT LEGALLY BINDS A
PARTY TO DO A CERTAIN THING. “Bond,” “obligation,” and “instrument in writing” are
sometimes used as convertible terms. A deed whereby the obligor obliges himself, his heirs,
executors, and administrators, to pay a certain sum of money to another at a day appointed,
See Oblige… A DEED OR OBLIGATORY INSTRUMENT, IN WRITING, WHEREBY ONE
BINDS HIMSELF TO ANOTHER TO PAY A SUM OF MONEY OR TO DO SOME OTHER
ACT. CONTAINS AN OBLIGATION WITH A PENALTY, and a condition which expressly
mentions what is to be done and the time within which it must be done. AT COMMON
LAW, and at the present time, IMPORTS A SEALED INSTRUMENT. Bonds are either
negotiable or non-negotiable. The former (negotiable bond) PASS OWNERSHIP BY MERE
DELIVERY; the latter, by written transfer, duly signed, sealed, and, perhaps, attested…
(WCA1889)

BONDAGE - SLAVERY. (Bouv1889)

BONDSMAN - One who BY A SEALED INSTRUMENT ENGAGES that IF ANOTHER

PERSON (THE PRINCIPAL) fails to do a speciÞed thing he will pay a certain sum of
money; A SURETY. (WCA1889)

—=—

Yes, the birth certiÞcate is a sealed instrument, the ofÞcial, raised seal being the Arms of the United
States. Yes, the agent (man) that uses that proprietary legal entity created by the birth certiÞcate is a
surety. Yes, a surety is in bondage to its principal. And so yes, you are, while acting in the persona
of US citizen-ship and according to the 13th amendment, a voluntary slave.

We must be clear here that all legal ofÞces are dead entities. That which proceeds from a dead ofÞce
or thing can only be another dead thing, never Truly Living, and thus never Existing with ßowing,
inheritable blood. All things in public ofÞce and ßattery of title are dead, including citizen-ships.
Nothing dead can bestow actual Life or other Real Existence through Þctional birth. Death cannot
pro-create Life, nor can a lower status establish or birth a higher status than itself. All legally public
and private (noun) persons (statuses) are dead, though some are worshiped as if they were Existing
(Living) gods in pretended sovereignty (a conÞrmed and ratiÞed lie), as magisterial kings, popes,
presidents, governors, prime ministers, bishops, and judges. Spiritual death is the simulation of
Real Life, but all simulations are inherently dead.

—=—

“He cannot be considered AS HAVING CEASED TO HAVE A THING

WHO NEVER HAD IT.”
—NON POTEST VIDERI DESISSE HABERA QUI NUNQUAM HABUIT. Dig. 50, 17, 208. (Black4)

—=—

!995
A Þctional, public persona never has Life, never has blood consideration, and never has perfected
patent to property, and so these cannot be ceased in or from it. A man acting in public persona and
registering all his property (including his children) in that status, which is the legal property of the
state, can never be considered to have been the actual holder or owner of that property, including
his own children (legally considered as natural persons/property of government). In other words,
when a man dies in Real Life, that which he held under the strawman name was always property
of the state. It was always in a state of districting, of seizure and distress. The person was already a
dead legal entity and property of the state, and so the man cannot be considered as ceasing to hold
anything if he always held that property in the name of that which was already legally pre-de-
ceased, in the commercial name of another.

To be born in abandonment (by legal delivery) to parents whoÕs ÒfatherÓ is the common people of
the district (the legal state) is to be born in the nativity (captivity) of the nation; a stillborn; pre-
deceased. Only when we cease to claim the rights of citizenship and reclaim our blood-right of
inheritance in Nature will we ever be spiritually alive again as the scriptural (spiritual) heirs. Until
then, we can only lay claim to the artiÞcial rights of the dead legal ofÞce we act within and exercise
in per-form-ance, per the form of anotherÕs person (property), and not the Property (Nature/
Source/Creation) of Jehovah. For this ofÞce (citizenship) is a capital offense which carries with it
the already existing punishment in forbearance of and in spiritual death by seizure. To be born in
sin is to carry that sin for the synthetic (legal) life of the person.

DEPART - verb intransitive - 1. To go or move from. Depart from me, ye cursed, into ever-
lasting Þre. Matthew 25:41. It is followed by from, or from is implied before the place left. I will
depart to my own land, that is, I will depart from this place to my own land. Numbers 10:30.
2. TO GO FROM; TO LEAVE; TO DESIST, AS FROM A PRACTICE. Jehu departed not from
the sins of Jeroboam. Jehoshaphat departed not from the way of Asa his father. 3. To leave; to
deviate from; TO FORSAKE; NOT TO ADHERE TO OR FOLLOW; as, we cannot depart
from our rules. I have not departed from thy judgments. Psalms 119:115. 4. To desist; to leave;
TO ABANDON; as, he would not depart from his purpose, resolution, or demand. 5. TO BE
LOST; to perish; to vanish; as, his glory has departed. 6. To die; TO DECEASE; to leave this
world. Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word. Luke 2:29.
To depart this life is elliptical, from being understood. 8. TO CEASE. The prey departeth not.
Nahum 3. 9. To deviate; to vary from. If the plan of the convention be found to depart from
republican principle. 10. To vary; TO DEVIATE FROM THE TITLE or defense in pleading.
11. To part with. TO DEPART FROM GOD, IS TO FORSAKE HIS SERVICE AND LIVE IN
SIN; TO APOSTATIZE; to revolt; TO DESERT HIS GOVERNMENT AND LAWS. GOD
DEPARTS FROM MEN, WHEN HE ABANDONS THEM TO THEIR OWN SINFUL
INCLINATIONS, or ceases to bestow on them his favor. Hosea 9. - verb transitive - To divide
or separate; to part. - noun - 1. The act of going away; DEATH. 2. Division; separation.
(Webs1828)

DECEASE - noun - [Latin to depart or to withdraw.] Literally, departure; hence, departure

from this life; DEATH; APPLIED TO HUMAN BEINGS ONLY. Moses and Elias, who
appeared in glory, and spoke of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem. Luke
9:31. - verb intransitive - To DEPART from this LIFE; to die. Gen. Washington deceased,
December 14, 1799, in the 68th year of his age. (Webs1828)

DE - A Latin preÞx, denotes a moving from, separationÉ Hence it often expresses a

negative… (Webs1828)

CEASE - verb intransitive - 1. To stop moving, acting or speaking; to leave of; TO GIVE
OVER; followed by from before a noun. It is an honor for a man to cease from strife. Proverbs
20:3. 2. To fail; to be wanting. The poor shall never cease out of the land. Deuteronomy 15:11.
3. To stop; to be at an end; as, the wonder ceases; the storm has ceased. 4. To be forgotten. I
would make the remembrance of them to cease. Deuteronomy 32:26. 5. TO ABSTAIN; as,
cease from anger. Psalms 37:8. To cease from labor, is to REST; to cease from strife, is to be

!996
 QUIET; but in such phrases, the sense of cease is not varied. - verb transitive - To put a stop to;
to put an end to. Cease this impious rage. [But in this use the phrase is generally elliptical, ] -
noun - EXTINCTION. (Webs1828)

—=—

To be in citizenship is to be in a de-ceased (belonging to Caesar) state of being, in an extinction of

the spirit, where whatever course the Laws of Nature might have driven us were diverted by
Þctional things and pursuits in worship of mammon. Thus, most of us may only ever depart from
that bondage of servitude (spiritual death) when our actual spark of Life ceases to Exist in the
Reality of Nature. Our bodies must die while still in the bondage of citizenship to escape that
status, though our children must carry on our burden. In other words, only when our biological
Life force is declared to be “deceased” do we ever escape our slavery to the nation we are borne
(carried) by, for the puppet cannot operate itself and has no inherent Life force. Its artiÞcial life must
be contracted by the man. To be ceased is to be in disquiet, unhappiness, unrest, dis-ease, and to
live only in legal life and Þction. The correlative or other side of this coin, as the corporation that
causes us to be ceased (seized) at birth, is the district. For the district is the Caesar, meaning that
which lays hold in seizure. That which taxes (registers). To be legally seized is to be required to
cease from our Natural, spiritual course under God.

SEIZE - To put in possession, INVEST WITH FEE SIMPLE, be seized of or IN, BE LEGAL
POSSESSOR OF, OR BE HOLDER IN FEE SIMPLE. (Black4)

SEIZE - verb transitive - 1. To fall or rush upon suddenly and lay hold on; or to gripe or grasp
suddenly. The tiger rushes from the thicket and seizes his prey. A dog seizes an animal by the
throat. The hawk seizes a chicken with his claws. The ofÞcer seizes a thief. 2. To take
possession by force, with or without right. At last they seize, The scepter, and regard not
David's son. Milton. 3. To invade suddenly; TO TAKE HOLD OF; to come upon suddenly;
as, a fever seizes a patient. And hope and doubt alternate seize her soul. Pope. 4. To take
possession by virtue of a warrant or legal authority. The sherif seized the debtor's goods; the
whole estate was seized and conÞscated. We say, to arrest a person, to seize goods. 5. To
fasten; to Þx. IN SEAMAN'S LANGUAGE, to fasten two ropes or different parts of one rope
together with a cord. To be seized of, to have possession; as a grifÞn seized of his prey. A B
WAS SEIZED AND POSSESSED OF THE MANOR OF DALE. To seize on or upon, is to fall
on and grasp; TO TAKE HOLD ON; TO TAKE POSSESSION. (Webs1828)

SEIZER - noun - One that seizes. (Webs1828)

CAESAR - The TITLE assumed by the ROMAN EMPERORS after Julius Caesar. In the New
Testament this title is given to various emperors as SOVEREIGNS OF JUDAEA WITHOUT
THEIR ACCOMPANYING DISTINCTIVE PROPER NAMES (John 19:15; Acts 17:7). The
Jews PAID TRIBUTE to Caesar (Matt. 22:17), and ALL ROMAN CITIZENS HAD THE
RIGHT OF APPEAL TO HIM. (Acts 25:11). (Easton's Bible Dictionary)

—=—

There is a reason that this word Caesar was used without the proper name. For the proper name
holds no false, legal authority, and only refers to the man wielding it. To be a tyrant or king (tzar) is
of course an improper use of a name. Without the title of Caesar, of King, or of President or of
judge, what authority would a proper man have to assume such despotic and ruthless roles as
these, and who among us would respect such a man without such a title and military, mercenary
force behind it? What is power without crown and title? For it is only the title that carries the
illusion, not the man. It is the fabled history of the idol, the title, that carries its imagined majesty to
its next bearer.

!997
 —=—

“You have but to know an object by its proper name for it to lose its
dangerous magic.”
—Elias Canetti

—=—

What power would Barack have over any man unless he was known as President Barack Obama?
What power would Elizabeth have over any man unless she was known as Queen Elizabeth? Take
the improper title away and all that is left is the proper name, which carries no weight whatsoever.

CESAREAN - adjective - The cesarean operation is THE TAKING OF A CHILD FROM THE
WOMB BY CUTTING; an operation, which, it is said, GAVE NAME TO CAESAR, the
Roman emperor. (Webs1828)

DISTRICTIO - Latin. A distress; a distraint. (Black4)

DISTRICT - noun - [Latin, to press hard, TO BIND. See DISTRAIN.] (See full deÞnition in
Chapter 2) (Webs1828)

STRICT - adjective - [Latin See Strain.] 1. Strained; drawn close; tight; as a strict embrace; a
strict ligature. 2. Tense; not relaxed; as a strict or lax Þber. 3. EXACT; ACCURATE; rigorously
nice; as, to keep strict watch. Observe the strictest rules of virtue and decorum. 4. Severe;
rigorous; GOVERNED OR GOVERNING BY EXACT RULES; OBSERVING EXACT
RULES; as, the father is very strict in observing the sabbath. The master is very strict with his
apprentices. 5. Rigorous; not mild or indulgent; as STRICT LAWS. 6. CONFINED; LIMIT-
ED; not with latitude; as, TO UNDERSTAND WORDS IN A STRICT SENSE. (Webs1828)

DI - A preÞx, a contraction of DIS, denotes from, separation or negation, or two. (Webs1828)

STRAIN - verb transitive - [Latin. This word retains its original signiÞcation, to stretch.] 1. To
stretch; to draw with force; to extend with great effort; as, to strain a rope; to strain the
shrouds of a ship; to strain the chords of an instrument. 2. To cause to draw with force, or
with excess of exertion; to INJURE by pressing with too much effort. He strained this horses
or his oxen by overloading them. 3. To stretch violently or by violent exertion; as, to strain the
arm or the muscles. 4. To put to the utmost strength. Men in desperate cases will strain them-
selves for relief. 5. To press or cause to pass through some porous substance; to purify or
separate from extraneous matter by Þltration; to Þlter; as, to strain milk. Water may be
strained through sand. 6. To sprain; to injure by drawing or stretching. Prudes decayd about
may tack, strain their necks with looking back. 7. To make tighter; TO CAUSE TO BIND
CLOSER. To strain his fetters with a stricter care. 8. TO FORCE; TO CONSTRAIN; TO
MAKE UNEASY OR UNNATURAL. His mirth is forced and strained. - verb intransitive - 1. To
make violent efforts. To build his fortune I will strain a little. Straining with too weak a wing.
2. To be Þltered. Water straining through sand becomes pure. - noun - 1. A violent effort; a
stretching or exertion of the limbs or muscles, or of any thing else. 2. An INJURY by excessive
exertion, drawing or stretching. 3. STYLE; CONTINUED MANNER OF SPEAKING OR
WRITING; as the genius and strain of the book of Proverbs. So we say, poetic strains, lofty
strains. 4. Song; note; sound; or a particular part of a tune. Their heavenly harps a lower strain
began. 5. Turn; tendency; INBORN DISPOSITION. Because heretics have a strain of mad-
ness, he applied her with some corporal chastisements. 6. MANNER OF SPEECH OR
ACTION. Such take too high a strain at Þrst. 7. RACE; GENERATION; DESCENT. He is of a
NOBLE STRAIN. [Not in use.] 8. HEREDITARY DISPOSITION. Intemperance and lust
breed diseases, which propagated, spoil the strain of a nation. [Not in use.] 9. RANK;
CHARACTER. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

!998
 DISTRAINER, or DISTRAINOR - He who SEIZES a distress. (Black4)

DISTRAINT - SEIZURE; THE ACT OF DISTRAINING or MAKING A DISTRESS. (Black4)

STRESS - noun - 1. Force; urgency; pressure; importance; that which bears with most weight;
as the stress of a legal question. Consider how much stress is laid on the exercise of charity in
the New Testament. This, on which the great stress of the business depends— 2. Force or
violence; as stress of weather. 3. FORCE; VIOLENCE; STRAIN. Though the faculties of the
mind are improved by exercise, yet they must not be put to a stress beyond their strength. -
verb transitive - TO PRESS; TO URGE; TO DISTRESS; TO PUT TO DIFFICULTIES. [Little
used.] (Webs1828)

DISTRESS - THE TAKING A PERSONAL CHATTEL OUT OF THE POSSESSION OF A

WRONG-DOER INTO THE CUSTODY OF THE PARTY INJURED, to procure a satisfaction
for a wrong committed; as for non-payment of rent, or injury done by cattle. THE TAKING
OF BEASTS OR OTHER PERSONAL PROPERTY BY WAY OF PLEDGE, TO ENFORCE
THE PERFORMANCE OF SOMETHING DUE FROM THE PARTY DISTRAINED UPON.
The taking of a defendant's goods, IN ORDER TO COMPEL AN APPEARANCE IN
COURT. The seizure of personal property TO ENFORCE PAYMENT OF TAXES, to be
followed by its PUBLIC SALE if the taxes are not voluntarily paid. Also THE THING
TAKEN BY DISTRAINING, THAT WHICH IS SEIZED TO PROCURE SATISFACTION.
And in old Scotch law, a pledge taken by the sheriff from those attending fairs or markets, to
secure their good behavior, and returnable to them at the close of the fair or market if they
had been guilty of no wrong. (Black4)

—=—

As horriÞc as it is to come to grips with, the United States (Washington DC) is the incorporation of
Caesar, which seizes by distress the property (issue) of its subjects, distraining and feigning
corruption of the blood (Nature) of all it can so as to seize all corrupted things. It does so to secure
the good behavior of its citizen-ships within the 50 foreign (private) states in protection of the
actual proclaimed sovereignty of those States (People) from we the commoners in commerce, and
so as to induce us to pay both our own and their own taxes. To be taken in distress is to be seized,
to be seized is to be taxed, and to be taxed is to be registered in certiÞed publicity into a contractual
feudal state, for to be birthed in distress is to become the commercial possession of the Caesar
(district). To be in legal possession through personhood is to have the capacity to be legally
summoned. Demonology is just citizenship, the demonologists merely pirates. The district of the
seizer (Caesar) always retains the right to conÞscate its found property (children) from those
illegitimate parents it has bestowed the right of limited parentage upon, due to the trickery of birth
registration (taxation) as a legal distress and distraint upon any Natural but unreserved paternal
rights.

These are the pirates of the law of the sea…

—=—

“…GOODS THROWN FROM A VESSEL IN DISTRESS BECAME THE

PROPERTY OF THE KING, OR THE LORD on whose shores they were
stranded.”
ÑDeÞnition for ÔALGARUM MARIS,Õ Laganum maris, lagan being a right, as ßotsam and jetsam. Spelman; Jacob; Du Cange. (Black4)

—=—

!999
As painful as this Reality is and as seemingly ludicrous this metaphorical system of robbery on the
virtual high seas appears to be in its linguistic presentation and authority, we must realize our
place, participation, and thus victimization within it if we are ever to be Free of it. We must destroy
our ego, our id-entity, and abandon our false hopes that one day government will somehow be
magically or ÒconstitutionallyÓ Þxed. It will not. It cannot. For its very foundation is the creation of
that district of Caesar as a pirate cove, posing as the sinful common people’s false messiah, and
offering safe public passage over its landholder's private lands only to those who will willingly
bear its public mark of Arms (ßag and seal). You simply cannot Þx what is not broken, and the
United States corporation runs like a well-oiled machine. It stands as the epitome of how organized
crime should be organized. Even satan smiles in jealousy of that nations’ success.

We are its vessels in distress (District of Columbia), its citizen-ships, and our children are
abandoned into a false persona within an artiÞcial, legal matrix, which is property of that district
where it has been stranded.

—=—

“In connection with SALVAGE, ‘shore’ means THE LAND ON WHICH

THE WATERS HAVE DEPOSITED THINGS WHICH ARE THE
SUBJECT OF SALVAGE, whether below or above ordinary high-water
mark.”
ÑFrom deÞnition of ÔSHORE,Õ (Black4)

—=—

The Þrst step to Þxing the problem, of course, is to Þrst admit our defeat. We must see ourselves
through the looking glass and perspective of the state. We must recognize our illiteracy above all
else, our absent-mindedness with regard to these terms of art, so that the art can no longer control
Reality.

And so, as difÞcult as it is, we must realize that for all intents and purposes, the legal birth
information, registration, and certiÞcation process is in-deed an act of legalized piracy. We must
recognize that our children are being pretendedly thrown from us into the imaginary, commercial
sea, straight into the hands of that kingship of “People” and stranded unto the seizure of Caesar’s
district, only to be found and incorporated (enfranchised) into the virtual property (foundlings) of
those magical word practitioners in the bond of surety and performance. We must face as well our
own such abandonment, a legally considered bastardy, and we must do so with absolute forgive-
ness for our parents who abandoned us, for causing our Þctional death through the legal birth
process without comprehension of their actions. They know not what they did, and the reader of
this has no excuse now to follow in that deranged custom and tradition of this debtorÕs hell. We
may not be able to save ourselves, but we can certainly free our children from this chain of mad-
ness and voluntary servitude by simply keeping their God-given name free from such legal ad-
dictions, performance sureties, and ad-vices, despite the social and legal pressures that may befall
us for choosing the moral path. Remember, the devil has no power but by his own words
(property), his unilateral contracts. His dis-eases cannot harm us unless we succumb to his forked
tongue and warning threats though the arts of language. The state is (by law) powerless without a
Þctional person (property) to bully.

Governments are ordained and established in conspiracy (confederation and combination) only to
create a lower, super-natural (outside of Reality) sovereign order and law, overseen by an upper-
class structure in Þction that adheres only to the doctrine of master and servant (volunteerism).
This is the epitome of Biblical, spiritual choice. Children are voluntarily abandoned and seized at
birth so that their parents can be summoned into court and be compelled to appear on behalf of
that which they are reassigned as the legal guardian of. For unless they appear in legal persona, the

!1000
legal child will be taken in distress and possibly sold at public sale for non-appearance, which
modernly under the lie of “Child Protective Services” and within the pretended legal corporate
property doctrine of “child welfare” is labeled as the “foster care” and “adoption” programs. This
is purely a process of civil, legal law, having nothing whatsoever to do with spirituality or charity,
Natural (negative) or paternal rights, or of the Natural Law. It’s all about mammon and the legal,
capitalist slave trade (commerce in souls), the only True value of the lower proles. This is legalized
kidnapping via the presumed contractual relationship of de-livery. These are the very bowels of
man’s created legal hell at its worse. For at least in open tyranny men know their positions and
rank in society. But in America, men have no idea of their places as literal live-stock under district
(seizure), as possessions of the state.

SEISI - In old English law. Seised; POSSESSED. (Black4)

SEISINA - L. Latin. Seisin. (Black4)

SEISINA FACIT STIPITEM - “Seisin makes the STOCK.” (Black4)

SEISIN - The completion of the FEUDAL INVESTITURE, BY WHICH THE TENANT WAS
ADMITTED INTO THE FEUD, AND PERFORMED THE RIGHTS OF HOMAGE AND
FEALTY. Possession with an INTENT on the part of him who holds it to claim a freehold
interest. Right to immediate possession according to the nature of the estate… Under our
law, the word "seisin" has no accurately deÞned technical meaning. At Common law, it
imported a feudal investiture of title by actual possession. With us it has the force of
possession under some LEGAL TITLE OR RIGHT TO HOLD. This possession, so far as
possession alone is involved, may he shown by PAROL; but, if it is intended to show
possession under a legal title, then the title must be shown by proper conveyance for that
purpose. EVERY PERSON IN WHOM A SEISIN IS REQUIRED by any of the provisions of
this chapter SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN SEISED, IF HE MAY HAVE HAD ANY
RIGHT, TITLE, OR INTEREST IN THE INHERITANCE.

Actual Seisin - Possession of the freehold by the pedis positio OF ONE'S SELF OR ONE'S
TENANT OR AGENT, or by construction of law, as in the case of a state grant or a
conveyance under the statutes of USES, or (probably) of grant or devise WHERE THERE
IS NO ACTUAL ADVERSE POSSESSION; it means ACTUAL POSSESSION AS
DISTINGUISHED FROM CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION OR POSSESSION IN
LAW.

Constructive Seisin - Seisin in law where there is NO SEISIN IN FACT; as where THE
STATE ISSUES A PATENT TO A PERSON WHO NEVER TAKES ANY SORT OF
POSSESSION OF THE LANDS GRANTED, he has constructive seisin of all the land in
his grant, THOUGH ANOTHER PERSON IS AT THE TIME IN ACTUAL
POSSESSION.

Livery of Seisin - DELIVERY OF POSSESSION; called, BY THE FEUDISTS,

“INVESTITURE”…

Seisin in Law - A right of immediate possession according to the nature of the estate. As
the old doctrine of corporeal investiture is no longer in force, THE DELIVERY OF A
DEED GIVES SEISIN IN LAW. (Black4)

—=—

So where is the local, state ofÞce that holds these records of original, ancestral sin? 



Where do we Þnd that keeper of the evil deeds of foolish men acting in Þction?

!1001
 —=—

“The REGISTER OF DEEDS ofÞce is the ofÞcial steward of birth

records for Orange County. The Orange County Register of deeds only
has birth records FOR PERSONS born in Orange County.”
—=—

“Birth CertiÞcates for births occurring in Guilford County are issued at

the Guilford County REGISTER OF DEEDS ofÞce…”
—=—

“The REGISTER OF DEEDS ofÞce provides a standardized, permanent

record of real estate ownership and transfers in Sampson County. Our
ofÞce records deeds, deeds of trust, cancellations, plats, ASSUMED
NAMES, powers of attorney and other miscellaneous documents related
to real estate. Our ofÞce also records and issues BIRTH CERTIFICATES,
death certiÞcates, marriage certiÞcates, marriage licenses, military
discharges, and maintains the records of notary public commissions.”
—=—

But why would birth certiÞcates be at an ofÞce that records wills and deeds?

Silly natural persons, tricks are for infants! The act of de-livery is an act of free will, an accounting
and recording of the dirty deeds of corrupted souls in illegitimate legal adultery under a registered
legal, Þctional corporation. The birth event is recorded as a deed of contempt to God, where the
mother informs on the criminal nature and felonious origin of her adulterous, illegitimate bastard.
Thus the deedÕs description and proÞle of vital statistics (the birth event) is certiÞed and recorded.

DEED - noun - 1. THAT WHICH IS DONE, ACTED OR EFFECTED; AN ACT; A FACT; a

word of extensive application, including WHATEVER IS DONE, GOOD OR BAD, great or
small. And Joseph said to them, what deed is this which ye have done? Genesis X1IV. We
receive the due reward of our deeds. Luke 23:41. 2. Exploit; achievement; illustrious act.
Whose deeds some nobler poem shall adorn. 3. Power of action; AGENCY. With will and
deed created free. 4. A WRITING CONTAINING SOME CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT,
AND THE EVIDENCE OF ITS EXECUTION; particularly, AN INSTRUMENT ON PAPER
OR PARCHMENT, CONVEYING REAL ESTATE TO A PURCHASER OR DONEE. THIS
INSTRUMENT MUST BE EXECUTED, AND THE EXECUTION ATTESTED, IN THE
MANNER PRESCRIBED BY LAW. INDEED, IN FACT; IN REALITY. These words are
united and called an ADVERB. But sometimes they are separated by very, in very deed; a
more emphatical expression. Exodus 9:16. - verb transitive - TO CONVEY OR TRANSFER BY
DEED; a popular use of the word in America; as, HE DEEDED ALL HIS ESTATE to his
eldest son. (Webs1828)

INVESTITURE - noun - The ACTION of giving POSSESSION, or LIVERY OF SEIZIN. THE

GRANT OF LAND OR A FEUD WAS PERFECTED BY THE CEREMONY OF CORPORAL
INVESTITURE OR OPEN DELIVERY OF POSSESSION. It was customary for princes to
make investiture of ecclesiastical beneÞces. 1. The right of giving possession OF ANY
MANOR, OFFICE OR BENEFICE. He had refused to yield to the pope the investiture of
bishops. (Webs1828)

!1002
 INVESTITURE - A ceremony which accompanied the grant of LANDS in the FEUDAL
AGES, and consisted in THE OPEN AND NOTORIOUS DELIVERY OF POSSESSION IN
THE PRESENCE OF THE OTHER VASSALS, which perpetuated among them the aera of
their new acquisition at the time WHEN THE ART OF WRITING WAS VERY LITTLE
KNOWN; and thus the evidence of the property was reposed in the memory of the
neighborhood, who, in case of disputed title, were afterwards called upon to decide upon it.
In Ecclesiastical law. Investiture is one of the formalities by which the election of a bishop is
conÞrmed by the archbishop. (Black4)

INVESTMENT - The placing of CAPITAL or laying out of money in a way INTENDED TO

SECURE INCOME OR PROFIT FROM ITS EMPLOYMENT. (Black4)

—=—

Never forget that hu-mans are merely animal capital just like cattle, counted by and taxed by the
head, and that money represents the future labor potential of those hu-mans. We are laid out in
commercial design and distraint with the intention that Caesar will collect the taxes of our income
by proÞting from our employment (use). We are under a hu-man capital management system
through our deeds (tributes) of investiture. We stand as certiÞed, voluntarily slaves; as mere agents
wrestling against these principalities (Ephesians 6:12).

It is perhaps easier to contemplate how our children are stolen through de-livery by seizure (seizin)
if we know that this act creates a modern type of feudal estate. In other words, a public person is
made to be a user of all public things. With no land of his own, the public person has investiture in
the ofÞce of citizenship, which means that he may never settle upon his own land except in
commercial residence (use only) without dominion over that land. The land will always be that of
another. His every step is a legally licensed (permitted) trespass on land foreign to him, called
public domain. His possession is only on behalf of the state with no right of disposal, only the
political right of usufruct. You see, these pirates never needed to steal any manÕs land, only his
Natural identity and capacity, as the removal of any spiritual connection to that land (Jehovah).

Just as a rat may roam freely in the franchise of what its owner allows within the borders of its
cage, the citizenship may roam freely (in franchise) within the public lands and municipal
corporations set up for its use (employment) by the sovereignty. Yet he may not travel on private
lands and estates or property, nor does he hold his own. There is nothing Truly private among
public entities. Only under God is this land (Earth) my land and this land is your land, but in legal
Þction this can only refer to certain limited tracts of designated Òpublic propertyÓ for commercial
use by commercial persons under taxation (registration) and fee without inheritable rights or
legitimate claim to that land. For legal land is only legal words of art on paper, and only private
men or papered public persons may tread there. We have only as much right as any refugee.
Ironically, illegals have more Natural rights than legals in the eyes of the legal state, though less
civil (required and forced) ones. 


—=—

“Government has no other end but the PRESERVATION OF PROPERTY.”

—John Locke (1632-1704) in ‘2nd Treatise on Civil Government,’ 1690

—=—

AhÉ but whose property is government protecting? Why its own creatorÕs, of course, which is to
say that government is set up always to protect the few lawfully legitimate blood-heirs against the
common hoard of goyim they have conquered (purchased) through trickery and mammon (debt) It
protects and preserves the founding PeopleÕs (PosterityÕs) holdings of land from being squatted on

!1003
by the mass of illiterates that they use as their labor pool of debtors in rent. Government, as the
agent of that sovereign bloodline of People in posterity, ensures that no common citizen (goy) may
ever be granted by prescription or realize by blood their lawful due. Organized crime. Piracy…

The only difference between the former feudal system and this modern legal system of today
known as 14th amendment citizenship (voluntary feudalism) is that the common goy have been
taught to read and write a language of illiteracy, as English or “dog-Latin,” and so the names,
motions, and ceremonies are all that have changed. The commoners in their legal capacity are less
intelligent than those of old, who at least knew their place in the feud and Þefdom. The English
language has created a new standard of literacy in stupidity. The feuds of today have no idea they
are seized, and are clueless in their deeds of de-livery. Whereas livery in history was an action
(deed) before witnesses (a verb), today the deed is written, signed, and registered in a language
(noun) designed to deceive.

SEISIN - …Upon the introduction of the feudal law into England, the word "seisin" was
applied only to the possession of an estate of freehold, IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO
THAT PRECARIOUS KIND OF POSSESSION BY WHICH TENANTS IN VILLEINAGE
HELD THEIR LANDS, which was considered to be the possession of those IN WHOM THE
FREEHOLD CONTINUED. THE WORD STILL RETAINS ITS ORIGINAL
SIGNIFICATION, being applied exclusively to the possession of land of a freehold tenure,
IT BEING INACCURATE TO USE THE WORD AS EXPRESSIVE OF THE POSSESSION
OF LEASEHOLDS OR TERMS OF YEARS, or even of copyholds. Under our law, the word
"seisin" has no accurately deÞned technical meaning. At common law, it imported a FEUDAL
INVESTITURE OF TITLE by actual possession. (Black2)

CESS - noun - A rate or tax - verb - TO RATE or LAY A TAX, is probably a corruption of
ASSESS, or from the same root. - verb intransitive - To neglect a legal duty. (Webs1828)

CESSION - noun - 1. THE ACT OF GIVING WAY; a yielding to force or IMPULSE. 2. A

yielding, or SURRENDER, AS OF PROPERTY OR RIGHTS, TO ANOTHER PERSON;
particularly, a surrender of conquered (i.e. won or purchased) territory to its former
proprietor or sovereign, by treaty. 3. In the civil law, A VOLUNTARY SURRENDER OF A
PERSONS EFFECTS TO HIS CREDITORS, TO AVOID IMPRISONMENT. 4. In
ecclesiastical law, the leaving of a beneÞce without dispensation or being otherwise qualiÞed.
When an ecclesiastical person is created a bishop, or when the parson of a parish takes another
beneÞce, without dispensation, the beneÞces are void by cession without resignation.
(Webs1828)

CESSOR - noun - 1. In law, he that neglects, for two years, to perform the service by which he
holds lands, so that he incurs the DANGER of the writ of cessavit. [See Cessavit.] 2. AN
ASSESSOR, OR TAXER. (Webs1828)

ASSESSOR - noun - 1. One appointed to assess the PERSON or PROPERTY. 2. An inferior

ofÞcer of justice, who sits TO ASSIST THE JUDGE. 3. One who sits by another, as next in
dignity. (Webs1828)

TAXER - noun - One who taxes. 1. In Cambridge, two ofÞcers chosen yearly to see the true
gauge of weights and measures observed. (Webs1828)

CESSAVIT - noun - In law, a writ given by statute, TO RECOVER LANDS, when the tenant
or occupier has CEASED for two years TO PERFORM THE SERVICE, WHICH
CONSTITUTES THE CONDITION OF HIS TENURE, and has not sufÞcient goods or
chattels to be DISTRAINED, or the tenant has so inclosed the land that the lord cannot
come upon it to distrain. (Webs1828)

—=—

!1004
We know that we are not the actual holder of property because we pay property taxes on it for our
secondary, permissive use. We hold nothing of the land, only the paper that re-presents it as legal
property in residence. A Þction cannot actually hold Reality. Remember, a home is only considered
as movable land, as that which is attached to the land. But this feudal state and knowledge is
doubly apparent when we do not perform our required service, which is to pay those taxes for use
of the property. It is then that the actual land, both immovable and movable by law, is recovered
through seizure and conÞscation by the militarized force of government in protection of the private
estate, and placed back into the title of the patented landholder alone, without defect of title or rent.

This is the purpose of government, of nations, as the preservation of property (including children)
through its power of distraint. We are in a constant state of distraint, for public persons of the
United States live only in a district of the United States. So we live in a constant state of distraint,
which is called the district of the United States. The child is distrained at birth, for the debt of the
parent is the performance of its contractual obligation, having nothing to do with any monetary
consideration, only the presumed obligation of the contractual duties and terms of law regarding
Þctional personhood, which also include certain public fees and taxes. The child is the product of
the labor of the marriage corporation under contract and license via conjugal, sexual intercourse
(commerce), and the state as principal in that three-way marriage contract takes (Þnds) all children
borne (carried) of that contract, for the husband and wife are only the agents acting in the personas
of their principal, and agents only ever do anything for the beneÞt of their principal. Just as an
employee uses the tools of his employer to beneÞt his employer and a servant works only to beneÞt
his master, so to do the legal parents (married or unmarried legal persons acting in the body politic
of incorporated surnames) raise their children only on behalf of and upon their principal, as its
property. A debtor is only a contracted public feud using the state’s children (property) in
enjoyment by usufruct under the beneÞcent will of the state, just as he merely uses the registered
automobile, land and home as the property of another. And when the assigned maternal parent in
his state-permitted and sanctioned guardian-ship is declared by the state to be a bad agent in that
contractual citizen-ship, the legal child (person) as presumed without rebuttal to be surety to the
property (person) of the principal is stricken and re-delivered (seized) into the state. This is done by
the act of distraint, as the causality and course of the child’s already legal disposition and implied
permanent legal existence in a state (district) of seizure. Children (the legal Þction), in other words,
are seized already, permanently, at birth. The child, by the ignorant will and continued consent of
the parents, is taken only as surety for the commercial ad-venture wagered upon though the
registered paper person (status); the strawman. Only through this Þction can man be tricked into
giving up his own blood right and inheritance, even to his own kin (issue).

We will read the opinions of the courts later in this work, which absolutely conÞrm these
statements as legally true. While they are horriÞc to contemplate, we must acknowledge them as
self-evident if we are ever to overcome them. In the end, though no man can be considered as
merchandise or as property to be bought and sold, i.e., involuntary slavery, the fact is that Þctional
inventions that are the “persons” of men can in-deed be considered as merchandise and as
property. The law against slavery can be abolished and reestablished at any time, the constitution
amended instantly at the whim of the land holders. We must remember that laws are subject to
change without notice to the public, which is why the public suffers as the patients of so many
ridiculous laws.

—=—

“He's not concerned with yesterday

He knows constant change is here today
He's noble enough to know what's right
But weak enough not to choose it…
He's a New World Man.”
—Rush, lyrics from the song ‘New World Man’

—=—

!1005
One thing is very clear, both morally and legally. If the parents don’t claim their own child (issue)
as their own paternal property by blood, the state will certainly do so like a thief in the night
through its legal trickery. This de-livery process is now such a streamlined process and custom that
these pirates go unseen, causing hospital employees (agents) to do their dirty work for them and
offering bonus checks for every child registered (taxed) into Caesar’s (seizure’s) system. Its agents
(nurses and social workers) complete their dirty legal deeds for them, receiving monetary
compensation as reward or assuming the role of the farmers of men; taxation-source creators.

DISTRAIN - verb transitive - [Latin dis and stringo. See Strain. Blackstone writes distrein.] 1. TO
SEIZE FOR DEBT; TO TAKE A PERSONAL CHATEL FROM THE POSSESSION OF A
WRONG-DOER INTO THE POSSESSION OF THE INJURED PARTY, to satisfy a demand,
OR COMPEL THE PERFORMANCE OF A DUTY; as, to distrain goods from rent, or for an
amercement. 2. TO REND; to tear. - verb intransitive - TO MAKE SEIZURE OF GOODS. On
whom I cannot distrain for debt. For neglecting to do suit TO THE LORDS COURT, OR
OTHER PERSONAL SERVICE, THE LORD MAY DISTRAIN OF COMMON RIGHT. [In
this phrase however some word seems to be understood; as, to distrain goods.] (Webs1828)

DISTRICT - noun - [Latin, to press hard, to bind. See DISTRAIN.] 1. Properly, a limited
extent of country; a circuit within which power, right or authority may be EXERCISED,
AND TO WHICH IT IS RESTRAINED; a word applicable to ANY PORTION OF LAND OR
COUNTRY, OR TO ANY PART OF A CITY OR TOWN, WHICH IS DEFINED BY LAW OR
AGREEMENT. A governor, a prefect, or a judge may have his district… (Webs1828)

DISSEIZE - verb transitive - [dis and seize.] In law, to DISPOSSESS wrongfully; TO

DEPRIVE OF ACTUAL SEIZIN OR POSSESSION; followed by of; as, to disseize a tenant of
his freehold. A man may suppose himself disseized, WHEN HE IS NOT SO. (Webs1828)

SEZIN - noun - 1. In law, POSSESSION. Seizin is of two sorts, seizin in deed or fact, and
seizin in law. Seizin in fact or deed, is actual or corporal possession; seizin in law, is WHEN
SOMETHING IS DONE IN WHICH THE LAW ACCOUNTS POSSESSION OR SEIZIN,
AS ENROLLMENT, OR WHEN LANDS DECEND TO AN HEIR, but he has not yet entered
on them. In this case, the law considers the heir as seized of the estate, and the person who
wrongfully enters on the land is accounted a disseizor. 2. The act of taking possession. [Not
used except in law.] 3. The thing possessed; possession. LIVERY OF SEIZIN. [See LIVERY.]
Primer of seizin. [See Primer.] (Webs1828)

SEIZING - ppr - Falling on and grasping suddenly; laying hold on suddenly; taking
possession by force, or taking by warrant; FASTENING. - noun - 1. The act of taking or
grasping suddenly. 2. In seamen's language, the operation of fastening together ropes with a
cord; also, the cord or cords used for such fastening. (Webs1828)

SEIZED - pp - Suddenly caught or grasped; taken by force; invaded suddenly; TAKEN

POSSESSION OF; fastened with a cord; having possession. (Webs1828)

—=—

These are not just antiquated, forgotten concepts. TheyÕre not out of date deÞnitions. They have
been “in the family” for many hereditary generations and ages of blood and of feudal fee. Only the
words have changed in their intentionally illiterate English presentation to the infantile masses, not
the origin of their Latin meanings. A delivered child is a ward of the court, which is evident to any
commoner who has gone through the so-called “family court” system and had their child stripped
from them and re-assigned to visitation on weekends and holidays, as if a common criminal is
being allowed to have the company of his family or of a prostitute in prison. This prison is open-air
though, the bars being only that of the courts private association of devils (attorneys). Oh, how I
wish that this term devil were just a clever nickname instead of the actual, ofÞcial English legal title
of those legal advocates and devilmasters (see section in Volume II and deÞnition on ÒdevilingÓ).

!1006
Ultimately delivery, certiÞcation, and registration has the foundational effect of remaking our
children as wards of the court. Wardship is citizenship. Citizenship is the simulation of parentage
(fatherhood) by the state. And so parents are just gloriÞed baby-sitters of state property.

WARD OF CHANCERY OR OF COURT - A minor or lunatic under the protection of a court

of equity. More particularly, a minor under the personal care of a guardian. "While the infant
is in ward.Ó A person under the age of twenty-one years, and subject to the guardianship of
another. An inseparable incident to tenure in chivalry was "wardship." When a tenant died
seized of a knight's fee, leaving an heir of full age, the king received of the heir a year's
proÞts of the land, if in immediate possession, and, IF IN REVERSION EXPECTANT ON A
LIFE ESTATE, a half year's proÞts. This right was called "PRIMER SEISIN.Ó If the heir was a
male under twenty-one, or a female under fourteen, THE LORD WAS ENTITLED TO THE
WARDSHIP OF THE HEIR, as "guardian in chivalry" Ñ WITH CUSTODY OF BODY AND
LANDS, without accounting, till the male was twenty-one and the female sixteen. ÒWardship
of the land," or CUSTODY OF THE FEUD, was retained by the lord that he might, out of the
proÞts, PROVIDE A PERSON TO SUPPLY THE INFANT'S SERVICES. A consequence was,
Òwardship of the body:Ó THE LORD WAS THE MOST PROPER PERSON TO EDUCATE
AND MAINTAIN THE INFANT, AND QUALIFY HIM FOR THE SERVICE SHE WAS TO
RENDER IN MATURITY. At maturity he could sue delivery of the lands out of the
guardian's hands; the action being called ouster le main. Before maturity the guardian had
power to dispose of his ward IN MATRIMONYÑto tender a suitable match; because of the
ward's tender years, and the danger of a female inter-marrying with the lord's enemy.
Magna Charta provided that notice of the proposed contract should be given to the next of kin.
"Wardship in socage" differed from wardship in chivalry. The inheritance, descending to an
infant under fourteen, did not belong to the lord of the fee, because no personal services
were required, and no part of the proÞts of the land were spent in procuring a substitute. The
ward’s nearest relation had custody of his land and body. At fourteen, the heir could oust
the guardian, require him to account for the proÞts, and choose another guardian. But as
heirs so young made improvident choices, enacted that the father might BY WILL APPOINT
a guardian to serve till the ward attained twenty-one. The father failing in that, THE
COURT OF CHANCERY WOULD NAME SUCH GUARDIAN. THAT STATUTE IS THE
ORIGINAL OF SIMILAR LEGISLATION IN THIS COUNTRY. See further Guardian;
Necessaries. (WCA1889)

LIVERY - noun - 1. The act of DELIVERING POSSESSION of lands or tenements; a term of

English law. It is usual to say, livery of seisin, which is FEUDAL INVESTITURE, made by
the delivery of a turf, of a rod or twig, from the feoffor to the feoffee. In America, no such
ceremony is necessary to a conveyance of real estate, THE DELIVERY OF A DEED BEING
SUFFICIENT. 2. RELEASE FROM WARDSHIP; DELIVERANCE. 3. The writ by which
possession os obtained. 4. The state of being kept at a certain rate; as, to keep horses at
livery. 5. A form of dress by which noblemen and gentlemen DISTINGUISH THEIR
SERVANTS. The Romish church has also liveries for confessors, virgins, apostles, martyrs,
penitents, etc. Hence, 6. A particular dress or garb, appropriate or peculiar to particular times
or things; as the livery of May; the livery of autumn. Now came still evening on, and twilight
gray had in her sober livery all things clad. 7. The whole body of liverymen in London. - verb
transitive - To clothe in livery. (Webs1828)

DELIVERY - noun - 1. THE ACT OF DELIVERING. 2. RELEASE; RESCUE; as from slavery,

RESTRAINT, OPPRESSION OR DANGER. 3. SURRENDER; A GIVING UP. 4. A GIVING
OR PASSING FROM ONE TO ANOTHER; as the delivery of goods, or of a deed. 5.
Utterance; pronunciation; or MANNER OF SPEAKING. He has a good delivery. I was
charmed with his graceful delivery. 6. CHILDBIRTH. Isaiah 26:17. 7. Free motion or use of the
limbs. (Webs1828)

Ñ=Ñ

!1007
This act of legal (artiÞcial) childbirth, as a creation and de-livery of the wardship of the child from
the natural parents into that of the persona of the state, is considered by the state an act of rescue.
This Òterm of the seaÓ is one of treasure being found, or that of saving the child from the low and
mean wretches that bore it under danger. ItÕs like the simulation of the hand of God reaching out to
protect the child from the unregenerate adultery and bastardy of the common proletariate. But in
Reality, this is merely a streamlined act of legalized piracy on the Þctional high seas of commerce,
of word trickery and magic designed to cause the act of volunteerism through language arts and
contract.

—=—

“Compacts (contracts) usually take their clothing from the thing itself,
from words, from writing, from consent, FROM DELIVERY.”
—RE, VERBIS, SCRIPTO, CONSENSU, TRADITIONE, JUNCTURA VESTES SUMERE PACTA SOLENT. Plowd. 161. (Black4)

—=—

“Compact: An agreement; a CONTRACT between parties; a word that

may be applied, in a general sense, TO ANY COVENANT OR
CONTRACT between individuals; but it is more generally applied to
agreements between nations and states, as treaties and confederacies.
SO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES IS A POLITICAL
CONTRACT BETWEEN THE STATES; A NATIONAL COMPACT…”
ÑWebsterÕs 1828 Dictionary of the English Language, deÞnition for Òcompact.Ó (Webs1828)

—=—

Think of a compact (contract) as two or more things being forced and pressed together, again, like
contracting a disease. Thus a constitution forces foreign States to support and defend each other
along with other goodies, yet to remain foreign (private) in their legal nature. And so of course the
People who created it had to protect themselves with the many negative aspects of that national
constitution, including the bill of rights, which only applies to the bloodline posterity who in turn
reserve all Natural and other Rights but what is speciÞcally (positively) constituted (not reserved).
They agree (contract) in their own State constitutions to be liable to eminent domain for public
purpose, for instance. But inversely no bill of attainder (corruption of blood) shall be passed against
them.

The only argument under debate was whether to use the words We, the People or the words We,
the States in the constitution (contract between foreign/several States/private Bloodlines and
Arms). After all, we wouldnÕt want the general people to get confused and think they are this special
People, right? Or do weÉ?

It is important to note here that this whole process is dependent upon one very important and
foundational thing, which is ignorance of scripture, of that Law of God and Nature. For the whole
process of de-livery is only based on one essential forbidden sin, that of the respect of persons and
ßattering titles. Only the title can be transferred, the admixed name, which carries with it the legal
simulation of a symbolic transfer (delivery/abandonment) of the possession of the Real thing,
carrying only the empty (legal) name and title in surety. We Þnd repeated over and over in
scripture that man should not respect the persons of men or that of the names applied to all things
in Nature over Nature Itself. Since the title is only an addition to the name of the person (Þction),
respect of ßattering titles represents Þrstly the respect of Þctional persons (legal names). The state

!1008
can only receive title to the legally recreated child (a Þctional, legal entity), which requires
abandonment of GodÕs Law by respect of the state-owned (proprietary) person (legal status) of
oneÕs own child. The birth and delivery process, in other words, can only take place in disrespect of
GodÕs Word of Law, the very foundation of all Law.



Religion? NoÉ Just plain uncommon sense? Absolutely! For religions can also only have ofÞcial
members by respecting the legal persons of men in combinations of the legal surname, and can
only attach their Þctional ÒreligiousÓ titles of ßattery and corporate priest-hoodÕs to the names of
those respected persons. The Mormons even demand to audit their members tax returns each year!

Why does no one ask what the purpose of the corporate church baptism ceremony is, that naming
ceremony that conÞrms the child to stand in blasphemy to GodÕs Word through assignment of an
assumed surname of the state? Corporate religions by necessity and by tax (registration) must
disrespect the very scriptural law they claim to worship, adhering only to the legal word (law) of
the false gods responsible for their legal incorporation. Therefore, a corporate religionÕs whole legal
existence is only ever according to the legal names and titles bestowed upon it by the legal state,
being lead only by legally educated and titled priests, ministers, rabbis, and pastors. These men are
only in the business of religion, not the Reality. They do not and cannot by the legal law walk the
path they pre-tend to preach, for they only have legal Òfreedom of religionÓ by license of the legal
state, which as we know makes actual religious, moral acts illegal. Thoughts are cool. But acting on
those thoughts? ThatÕs deÞnitely a legal no-no! So to be clear here, EVERY legally titled priest of
EVERY legalized corporate religion is a hypocrite, acting in legal, ßattering title only, either by
choice or by accident of birth and through the instillment of public-mindedness through corporate,
religious universities that teach only ignorance of the scriptures in lieu of their own chosen and
incorporated doctrines. In the end, no reader and studier, no priest of the scriptures that has done
even a small portion of the due diligence required to fully grasp the moral Law of the Bible would
ever set foot in such a legal establishment as any state incorporated and legally licensed Òchurch.Ó
But as we have now come to know, especially in these modern and technological times, it seems
more often today that this priest-class becomes the hirelings of some corporate religion not to
practice True Piety under God, but to hide behind the public, sacred (cursed) robes and crosses in
protection of their own private hungers of pedophilia and other ÒcardinalÓ sins. This is a perfect
example of the reasons not to respect such ßattering titles of the Þctional persons (reputations) of
men, and why legal law should not be mixed with the spiritual Law. The priest hides behind his
cross, his collar, for legal protection, instead of using it to thwart that very legal system (the state)
that protects his sins. For there is no sin without law, and no license without sin. A criminal or a
cardinal, the difference is only in these ßattering titles. And theyÕre both frightened by God.

Please know that the author isnÕt making a personal judgement here. Again, we must acknowledge
the problem before we can solve it. The author only presents the Truth while acknowledging his
own sins and participatory part in this system of mammon. I can only judge myself, just as the
reader, the priest, the politician, the judge, and the average goy in citizen-ship can only do the
same. I only seek the Truth despite my opinions of my ßattering but false legal self, for I cannot
know and follow the right path without exposing all of its wrong turns and pitfalls. We cannot
make a choice unless we know the full consequences and power of each choice available to us. And
most of us have no idea such choices even Exist, thanks to the illusions cast by these legal word-
smiths, magicians, accountants, attorneyÕs (devils), and priests.

Titles simply do not Exist in Nature, and so any title assumed by man is only ever that which is
unnatural, against GodÕs Word of Law. Nowhere in the Bible does it tell us to trust any8 man
because he is a Òpriest,Ó or under any other ßattering title for that matter. There are no priests in
Nature. No man, in other words, is born a priest.

RABBI, RABBIN - noun - A TITLE ASSUMED by the Jewish DOCTORS, signifying

MASTER OR LORD. This title is not conferred by authority, but ASSUMED or ALLOWED
BY COURTESY to learned men. (Webs1828)

!1009
 PRIEST - noun - [Latin proestes, a chief, one that presides; proe, before, and sto, to stand, or
sisto.] 1. A MAN WHO OFFICIATES IN SACRED OFFICES. AMONG PAGANS, PRIESTS
WERE PERSONS WHOSE APPROPRIATE BUSINESS WAS TO OFFER SACRIFICES AND
PERFORM OTHER SACRED RITES OF RELIGION. In primitive ages, THE FATHERS OF
FAMILIES, PRINCES AND KINGS WERE PRIESTS. Thus Cain and Abel, Noah, Abraham,
Melchizedek, Job, Isaac and Jacob offered their own sacriÞces. In the days of Moses, the ofÞce
of priest was restricted to the tribe of Levi, and the priesthood consisted of three orders, the
high priest, the priests, and the Levites, and the ofÞce was made HEREDITARY IN THE
FAMILY of Aaron. Every priest taken from among men IS ORDAINED FOR MEN in things
pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacriÞces for sins. Hebrews 5:1. 2. In the
modern church, a person who is set apart or consecrated to the ministry of the gospel; A
MAN IN ORDERS OR LICENSED TO PREACH THE GOSPEL; a presbyter. In its most
general sense, the word includes archbishops, bishops, patriarchs, and all SUBORDINATE
orders of the clergy, DULY APPROVED AND LICENSED ACCORDING TO THE FORMS
AND RULES OF EACH RESPECTIVE DENOMINATION OF CHRISTIANS; as all these
orders 'are ORDAINED for men in things pertaining to God.' But in Great Britain, the word is
understood to denote the subordinate orders of the clergy, above a deacon and below a
bishop. In the United States, the word denotes ANY LICENSED MINISTER of the gospel.
(Webs1828)

—=—


Take notice that in the legal and general deÞnition of this word priest or presbyter, there is no
mention of christ or of God in the Þrst person, only of the permissive, subjective authority of men
(as gods both civil and ecclesia, anti-God) to appoint and ordain other men into legal ofÞces
through licensure. The title is attached to the legal, admixed surname (false persona) that obtains
the license, enjoined to that last name which is legally superior to the christian name, as that which
lies in opposition to God. This is not just some mere oversight on our controllerÕs part. This is the
subversion of just what it means to be an actual religious man detached from all artiÞcial things,
names, numbers, marks, titles, and other doctrines (laws), all of which are needed to be a legally
licensed “priest.” The surname ensures that the man will follow the law of the state that bestows
the legal title to that surname, never acting by his God-given christian name under Its Higher Law.
And so these followers (priests) act according to their legalized leader, never attaining that Higher
State (Verb) of Being in the Nature of Jehovah. We are stuck in the noun. We reside in the land of
make-believe, never entering the domicile of GodÕs Kingdom of Nature.

The author can only hope that the reader now contemplates the corruption of both religion and of
the many forms and degrees of atheism and paganism as organized false “churches,” and that the
disposition of the authorÕs treatment of these institutionalized, conÞrmed, and ratiÞed fallacies is
not merely a trivial pursuit or somehow not based in principles of Reason and of spirituality. These
social incorporations are but nouns (names) designed to hide the verb (action) of the Truth of the
Nature of God and manÕs relationship to It. They are different forms of organized chaos. And both
are designed to divide and conquer the otherÕs spirit.

Both are designed to cause ignorance, to make a people perish by their lack of knowledge. Both are
creations of government intended to cause the normalization of a generational birth and
abandonment system through legal, voluntary de-livery of all future children as issues into the
hands of the state in artful perpetuity. For the only escape is through scriptural teachings, in
Þnding and following the spiritual path. And while the corporate churchÕs teach a false-religion
that ignores the fundamentals of GodÕs Law, atheism teaches a Godless law that despises True
Religion. A naturalist is not of Nature, any more than a licensed, titled priest is of GodÕs Nature.
Both are purveyors of the noun. Both only cause man to positively respect and be respected by the
legal Þction unwittingly, each taking away by design the negative protection of GodÕs Nature and
Law, which is the only Law self-evidently recognized as supreme to all others. Both worship only
mammon (false values), and use that god of money to battle each other in constant political debate

!1010
and subterfuge without spiritual, scriptural wisdom. Organized, impersonal religion and atheism
can only ever keep man in subjection and slavery to other men and to their legal systems of
mammon.

DELIVERY - TRANSFER OF THE BODY OR SUBSTANCE; SURRENDER OF PHYSICAL

POSSESSION OR CONTROL; tradition. Opposed to non-delivery. To “deliver” is TO GIVE
OR TRANSFER ANYTHING TO ANOTHER PERSON… “Delivery,” used alone, is of
PERSONAL PROPERTY; of letters, notices, telegrams; of negotiable instruments; of
SEALED INSTRUMENTS; of opinions, CHARGES, verdicts. 1. In the law as to gifts, sales,
and transportation of personalty, delivery is absolute or conditional, actual or constructive,
and symbolical.

Absolute delivery - A transfer without any qualiÞcation, expressed or implied.

Conditional delivery - A transfer accompanied by one or more conditions which must be

fulÞlled before the GENERAL property vests in the possessor. A conditional sale may
become an absolute sale by an unconditional delivery of the goods, the title then
passing to the PURCHASER. To constitute a conditional delivery IT IS NOT
NECESSARY THAT THE SELLER DECLARE THE CONDITIONS IN EXPRESS
TERMS. It is sufÞcient if the INTENT of the parties, that the delivery is conditional,
CAN BE INFERRED FROM THEIR ACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASE.

Actual delivery - Manual or corporal transfer, made in FACT OR REALITY.

**AuthorÕs Note: A legal fact is never a Reality, and most often is an accepted or conÞrmed lie.
Thus, the distinction is used here between fact OR Reality. Reality is never Þction, and facts
are never Reality, because similitude (fact) is not sameness (Reality), and at best these facts are
only the creations of man, of words (simulations, synthetics), and at best of man’s own
perspective. The part (perspective) is never the whole (Reality, e.g., the whole Truth).

Constructive delivery - A transfer which WHILE NOT IN REALITY MADE IS YET

VIEWED IN LAW AS AS GOOD AS MADE. "Constructive delivery" is a general term,
comprehending all acts which, although NOT TRULY CONFERRING A REAL
POSSESSION OF THE THING sold on the vendee, HAVE BEEN HELD constructione
juris EQUIVALENT TO ACTS OF REAL DELIVERY.

Symbolic or symbolical delivery - HANDING OVER ONE THING AS EVIDENCE OF

PARTING WITH OWNERSHIP IN ANOTHER OR OTHER THINGS. Delivery is
frequently SYMBOLICAL; as, delivery of the key to a room containing goods, BY
MARKING timber on a wharf or goods in a warehouse, or by separating, measuring, or
weighing them; or otherwise constructive, as by delivery of part for the whole; or by
delivery of a BILL OF LADING or of a bill of sale. See Gift. (WCA1889)

LIVERYMAN - noun - 1. ONE WHO WEARS A LIVERY; AS A SERVANT… (Webs1828)

LIVERYMAN - A MEMBER OF SOME COMPANY IN THE CITY of London; also called a

"FREEMAN."(Black4)

WORDS OF PURCHASE - When, in a will, the limitation of a remainder is to a "son" or

"sons," "children" or "issue," "heir" or "heirs " of the life tenant, if the word is a descriptio
personae, the descendant takes as a PURCHASER; it intended to comprehend A CLASS TO
TAKE BY INHERITANCE, the word is a term of "LIMITATION," within the rule in Shelley's
case. "CHILD" AND "CHILDREN" ARE ALWAYS REGARDED AS WORDS OF
PURCHASE, unless the testator unmistakably used them as descriptive of the extent of the
estate given, and not to designate the donees, in which case they are words of limitation.

!1011
 "CHILDREN" IS CERTAINLY A WORD OF PURCHASE AS "HEIRS OF THE BODY" ARE
WORDS OF LIMITATION. This is the rule, but a testator may evince a different INTENT.
See further Child; Heir; Issue; Limitation; Shelley's Case. (WCA1889)

HIRING - A CONTRACT FOR THE USE OF PERSONALTY, OR FOR SERVICES. A species

of BAILMENT for a price or recompense. 1. As to things. A CONTRACT whereby THE
POSSESSION AND A TRANSIENT PROPERTY IS TRANSFERRED FOR A PARTICULAR
TIME OR USE, ON CONDITION TO RESTORE THE GOODS AS SOON AS THE TIME IS
EXPIRED OR THE USE PERFORMED, together with the price, expressly agreed upon or
left to be IMPLIED BY LAW ACCORDING TO THE VALUE OF THE SERVICE. THE
HIRER ACQUIRES A TEMPORARY PROPERTY IN THE THING, accompanied with AN
IMPLIED CONDITION TO USE IT with moderation; while the owner or lender retains a
REVERSIONARY INTEREST in the thing, and ACQUIRES A NEW PROPERTY IN THE
PRICE OR REWARD. Of such is the loan of money on interest. 2. As to services. The
contracts classed under this head are contracts for work, for the safe-keeping of personalty,
and for the carriage of persons or personalty. "Storage" and "carriage" are in more common
use than any inßections of hire, to designate a contract for the custody of ordinary
merchandise, or for the transportation of persons or property.’ The idea of "hiring" may be
involved in "employment," but its application is not restricted to any particular mode of
use.” See Bailment; Deposit; Locatio. (WCA1889)

PERSONALTY - Personal PROPERTY. (WCA1889)

PERSONAL - Pertaining to the person; belonging to an individual person; individual: as,

personal or a personal — action, asset, baggage, chattel, contract, covenant, credit, demand,
disability, estate, goods, injury, knowledge, liability, liberty, note, performance, property,
representative, security, service, servitude, tax. REFERRING TO SOME SUBJECTS — AS,
AN ACTION, ASSET, CHATTEL, ESTATE, PROPERTY — “PERSONAL” MEANS SIMPLY
MOVABLE, TRANSITORY: THAT WHICH MAY FOLLOW THE PERSON OF THE
OWNER OR DEFENDANT. Again, referring to some subjects — as, an action, contract or
covenant, defendant, injury, privilege, security, service, tax — “personal” is contrasted with
real, or that which concerns REAL ESTATE. See those substantives. (WCA1889)

—=—

“But he that is AN HIRELING, AND NOT THE SHEPHERD, WHOSE

OWN THE SHEEP ARE NOT, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the
sheep, and ßeeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.
THE HIRELING FLEETH, BECAUSE HE IS AN HIRELING, AND
CARETH NOT FOR THE SHEEP.”
—John 10:12-13, KJB

—=—

The priest feigns the corporate ofÞce of shepherd, but this is a false family. The state feigns the
corporate ofÞce of family, of a father-hood, but again this is just a false, unnatural familiarity.
Neither care actually, Naturally for their sheep except as commodities that bring in tithing and
revenue. And for this reason, it is said that man should only call christ, the Son (Word/Law) of
God, as his shepherd, as his guide through legal trappings and trickery.

Whatever one’s lord is, be it Jehovah or the false gods and magistracy of legal and ecclesiastical re-
creation, that lord shall surely keep you.

!1012
The bloodline careth for its own ßock, shepherding its own while despising all others as mere
beasts. And so multiculturalism is foisted upon the public, for the public can have no set religion
and no set moral law, lest it lose its collectivist, communitarian, foolish consent. Multiculturalism is
public-mindedness, the acceptance of all opposing forces as one cult-ure bound by one amoral
(absence of set moral) law. It is not that the public has freedom of religion, it is that religion is
illegal accept by corporate license. For freedom is only a word meaning franchise controlled by
anotherÕs dominion and jurisdiction. And so while it appears that religion abounds, no public
person is actually able to act religiously in any moral, non-corporate sense of the word. We may put
on the heirs and costumes and go through the ceremonies and customs, but we can never deny the
one thing that defeats all religious and spiritual actions, which is the legal (anti-God) law. We are
fools declaring and pretending to be that which we are not, prancing around in the very ßattering
titles forbidden by GodÕs Nature and Law. We claim that I AM ÒChristian,Ó I AM ÒMuslim,Ó I AM
ÒCatholic,Ó I AM ÒJewish,Ó etcÉ Yet the religions of the earth say to only ever be plainly at Oneness
with the I AM of the Nature of Jehovah, or just I AM. The bible does not say to be ÒChristianÓ any
more than the Quran says to be ÒMuslimÓ or ÒIslamic.Ó For these are only ßattering titles of the
incorporations of men in the personiÞcation of mammon and their corporate members. The Holy
Books only teach action, not excuses.

The word Muslim is merely a term that etymologically means to be whole and intact. This is
scripturally the same as the teachings of christ, to be only as I AM with no additions, titles,
numbers, etc. The only wars fought between religions and the governments surrounding them are
over the authority of the false names of those religions in their secular governing capacities, which
ironically all teach the same goal. I AM ÒChristianÓ must kill I AM ÒMuslimÓ which must kill I AM
ÒJewish.Ó Yet each religion is a similitude, with the simple message that we should be only I AM.
Ironically, to be ÒMuslimÓ is but a false religious ßattering title just as a corporate ÒChristianÓ of
that entitled Romish church, is to not be Whole, Pure, and intact in (at one with) oneÕs Self. For the
ßattering title is an addition that takes away the ability to be whole and intact under God by our
purely religious (spiritual) actions. The church only exists under the governmentÕs legal law that
binds it in Þction (sin) against GodÕs Law. And for GodÕs sake these institutionalized religions
absolutely love their own holy wars!

But the governments and religions of man ensure continuous discord for the purposes of the
perpetual cycles and wealth generation of war and commerce. And this vicious cycle can only
continue as long as men can be made to believe they are strawmen, that they are not all a part of
GodÕs Creation (I AM) without any Þctional representation, religion, or law of man. This is the self-
evident Truth of God; that if all men are our sheep and our shepherd, then we must care for all men
not as some job title but as if we are all one family.

The author realizes the difÞculty engendered in this philosophy, which is why the author is not
seeking or selling modern governments and religions as any form of solution. They must be left to
kill themselves, for they are already in dead hands and pledge (mortgage). The spiritual man can
only walk away from these Þctions. And so the only question that remains is where do we walk to?
This is the great mystery. Christ had no destination, no end to his journey, and no place to call
home, for all these things are only legal and thus temporary, as that which is opposed to Nature.
And because of this, he had no wars to Þght except with that not of man himself but of manÕs
designs in artiÞce that deßected him from his own Natural path, a constant battle against Þction
but not necessarily against the men respecting it. His was a battle of words, of parables, and of
unrequited moral wisdom and rectitude. This is not to say that a man may not build a dwelling and
Live peaceably there for a time. This is to say that in Nature (in Reality) there is no insurance, no
security, and no protections. And so we must at all times be prepared to lose all possessions in
order to maintain the Permanence of our spiritual Nature under God. We must be willing to walk
the path wherever it may lead in perpetual spirituality away from the evils of the artiÞce. But
spirituality does not include stuff. The church is not a building or a physical structure or house. We
should not go to war to ensure the survival of our acquired stuff over the very Lives and blood of
our family, our True church. The church is only the ßock. And the ßock needs no artiÞce, name, or
title to Exist in Oneness. It needs only the Highest Law. It is of the blood of christ, not of masonry. It

!1013
certainly does not need a corporation or a building to be part of the I AM both individually and as
a whole. Whether our ßock is 1 or 100 or 7 billion, we must always place Its wellbeing and
especially that of each individual over all other considerations, but only in consideration of our
duty to his or Its negative righteousness. And yet we must treat all men in this way, even our
supposed enemies. The man with nothing to steal from is certainly the bitter enemy of these pirate
gods of the nations who sponsor and gain with legal license from all forms of theft. And yet we are
taught scripturally to treat even the highest and the lowest only how we should wish them to treat
us. No man is a Òthief,Ó for this is merely a ßattering title bestowed upon the consequences of the
pain and corruptibility of such desperate men, as that which is a potential of all men when given
unbearable wealth, authority, or poverty, all of which corrupt absolutely or through a falsely
created political necessity, as a pretended, manufactured scarcity created by those that covet wealth
over welfare. To the wealthy man, happiness may only be retained by the ensured poverty of
others. We must not incorporate our charity and never seek reward or expectation of reciprocation
for it, for this is the artful, false nature of the corrupting legal relationship in contract. We must not
legalize our words into property nor pretend to have the legal capacity and status (personhood) of
under-standing them. We must not respect anything but what is Reality, for all other stuff is only an
anchor to the Þction. The worst legal phrase we can respect is to say that anything is mine. For only
manÕs false re-creation of words on paper can be owned, and this is the basic underpinning of the
legal system, for the system is owned by the few to control the many through licensure and debt.
Property is an example of this, for we own only a paper representation of anotherÕs property, and
thus we are enslaved to that actual holder and his confederation of ÒPeople.Ó Only Þctional titles
can be owned.

Under the Natural Law, it is our duty to respect privacy and to not tread on others stuff just as we
would expect others should do unto ourselves. The only difference is that, because we are
dualistically (at the same) time each otherÕs shepherd and sheep, not one of us should ever be in
want of anything we may need. There is no need for the laws of men if no one man has need to
violate the Laws of God. Under the Highest Law, need trumps want. Without want and desire,
need is no crime. Without crime, criminal law is not needed. Without manÕs criminal justice system
of legal law and without crime, Þctions of law need not exist in ßattering title to obey or to enforce
such laws of men and mammon. And without legal personhood (status), there is nothing for that
artiÞce of law to attach to. This (Pure, Loving Charity at all times) is the only solution, a True and
Lawful Existence without valuation, money, or debt of any kind. For that system of artiÞce will use
each of us to stay in power, pitting us against each other in the competition of agency, killing and
incarcerating as many of its artiÞcial ßock in surety as it must in order to continue its own false
existence for the beneÞt of the few privy to the legal ÒsovereigntyÓ of their own State (corporation).
But in Reality, in Nature, only God is Sovereign, which makes us all equally, spiritually wealthy.

This word hire as used in the Bible above is utilized only in conjunction to the words reward and
wages. One cannot be considered a hireling (prostitute) unless his reward is of mammon. A hireling,
of course, works only for the monetary rewards and wages of his master or principal in mammon.
A soldier is paid his just and evil rewards as a hired mercenary, and each Life he takes carries its
own, perverted reward for each nation, generally paying a life insurance premium (reward for
death) to the originating nation of that soldiers military title, like a board game of ÒRiskÓ between
the gods of nations. And so a hireling can never earn any spiritual reward for his actions, for he acts
on behalf of another, a stranger that is opposed to all the spirit of Law and Nature. Likewise, a
citizen-ship in persona acts only as a hireling of his principal government, never able to obtain
anything of the spiritual rewards of GodÕs Nature. A public person in citizenship knows only his
masterÕs principal desires, and works towards that end only in the agency relationship, as his
shepherdÕs hireling and tool of mammon. He is simultaneously the sheep-dog and the sheep of
other dogs (agents); the manager of some slaves while the slave of other managers.

One is hard-pressed not to consider here that strange social example of those unhappy hirelings of
the DMV and Post OfÞce perched in their seats of federal agency and practicing proudly (and quite
often contemptuously) what limited, licensed authority they Þctionally possess by their federal
employment (being used), while dictating like house-slaves those services, beneÞts, and fees

!1014
required by all others who must submit to and temporarily worship them in their uni-formed
ßattering title of employed ofÞcers in agency, even while they suffer the same fate and fees as their
perturbed and resentful, temporary subjects. But then we all pretend to be something we are not in
our titles of employment, do we not? And more often than not we use that hireling status and ofÞce
with arrogant pride and false authority in our own meager dealings with others, if only to feel
better about our own subjection to all the other hireling agents out there prostituting themselves to
their constituted authorities. No employee is acting in his own spirit, and certainly not in the spirit
of christ. And so an employer is only as a hireling shepherd, caring not for his ßock except by what
he may personally gain from their employment (use) as human capital. An employee is only ever
working for the beneÞt of his employer, as that principalÕs own uncaring shepherd not of men but
of other legal persons, just as a subject in citizenship only ever exists for service to its master. For
every agent only ever exists at the behest and will of its principal creator. And the creator (god)
controls…

Our ultimate test in this Life, in this authorÕs opinion, is our choice between the darkness and the
Light. This highly interpretable and metaphoric notion of Light vs. darkness is that of Good vs evil,
Nature vs. Þction, Posterity vs. agency, Spirituality vs. legalism. And yet it is so often that the dark-
ness is portrayed as the only light available, the artiÞcial light of satanism (that which is adversarial
to the Light of God). Light is True knowledge. False light is the fruit of useless (seedless/unnatural)
information, a knowledge of Þction and art.

—=—

“And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, AND
MEN LOVED (BELIEVED IN) DARKNESS RATHER THAN LIGHT,
because their DEEDS WERE EVIL. For every one that doeth evil hateth
the light, neither cometh to the light, LEST HIS DEEDS SHOULD BE
REPROVED. BUT HE THAT DOETH TRUTH COMETH TO THE
LIGHT, THAT HIS DEEDS MAY BE MADE MANIFEST, THAT THEY
ARE WROUGHT IN GOD.”
—John 3: 19-21, KJB

—=—

“Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I AM THE LIGHT OF THE
WORLD: he that followeth me SHALL NOT WALK IN DARKNESS
(spiritual death), but shall have THE LIGHT OF LIFE.”
—John 8:12, KJB

—=—

Not in death shall we Þnd GodÕs Realm, but in the Light of a spiritual Life on earth following the
path set out by christ (GodÕs Word/Law). But Life only Exists in Nature, never in the artiÞcial
construct of manÕs legal matrix and inventions.

I pause here to reßect on my own former ignorance of the words in the scriptures. This last verse,
though it be obvious to me now, was but a ßeeting notion in some hymn I once knew on the guitar.
I sang its words without conscious awareness of its intent, and I spoke in arrogance of those words
in my discourse with others. I was in darkness. I was mislead under artiÞcial lighting. It was only
when I started following in those footsteps of christ even in my very limited capacity, by

!1015
deciphering and following the words of the Bible, that I fathomed any of the spiritual intent of this
verse. For while the non-proÞt, non-prophet priests sold from their pulpits the lie that I could
simply believe that christ at one point in history Existed as a historical Þgure, and that this belief
(false love) is all that was needed to be a member of that secular corporation posing as legitimate,
True religion, the True spiritual journey implied by these words in every walk of Life has nothing to
do with some anthropomorphized history, only with my own will and actions for or against that
which is the darkness of the established and ordained legal and ecclesiastical artiÞce. The spirit is
Alive, not dead. Choose Light, not graven darkness. And like the artiÞcial spirit of legal persons,
christ can only be alive if I act in his personiÞcation. Christ can only Alive in spirit through my own
actions upon the path that was laid out by those scriptural teachings.

Or I can continue to act like a demonic persona in possession by the state.

We all have a choice…

The deed of placing a child into birth registration by unwitting parents who, in conceded consent
to the darkness of voluntary ignorance know not what they do, is an act of voluntary
condemnation (being condemned to live in a nation under its false law), setting the child upon the
path of darkness by romanizing and romancing the form of its name. This sentences in writing the
criminal child as a ward of the state, districting (distraining/seizing for debt) all of us into the
darkness of that commercial, municipal corporation of Washington DC and binding us to another’s
(a stranger’s) law.

DISTRICTIO - Latin. A distress; a distraint. (Black4)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - A territory situated on the Potomac river, and being the seat of
government of the United States. It was originally ten miles square, and was composed of
portions of Maryland and Virginia ceded by those states to the United States; but in 1846 the
tract coming from Virginia was retroceded. LEGALLY IT IS NEITHER A STATE NOR A
TERRITORY, BUT IS MADE SUBJECT, BY THE CONSTITUTION, TO THE EXCLUSIVE
JURISDICTION OF CONGRESS. (Black4)

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - IS NEITHER A STATE NOR A TERRITORY. CONGRESS IS

AUTHORIZED "TO EXERCISE EXCLUSIVE LEGISLATION IN ALL CASES
WHATSOEVER OVER SUCH DISTRICT (not exceeding ten Miles square) AS MAY, BY
CESSION OF PARTICULAR STATES, AND THE ACCEPTANCE OF CONGRESS,
BECOME THE SEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES." Maryland and
Virginia ceded territory on the Potomac, which Congress, by act of July 16, 1790, accepted. In
December, 1800, THE SEAT OF GOVERNMENT WAS REMOVED FROM PHILADELPHIA.
By the act of July 11,1846, Congress retroceded the county of Alexandria to Virginia. THE
DISTRICT CONSTITUTES THE COUNTY OF WASHINGTON. A CITIZEN OF THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IS NOT A CITIZEN OF A STATE. The laws in force December 1,
1873, were revised and republished, by direction of Congress, in a separate volume known as
the Revised Statutes relating to the District of Columbia. (WCA1889)

—=—

What is birthed in the district is bound in nativity to the exclusive jurisdiction of congress in the
public United States. That’s freedom, you see? A county is only a municipal corporation, which
indeed is neither a State nor a territory.

But more importantly, as we read between the lines here, A UNITED STATES CITIZEN IS
STATELESS! In other words, that which is public property of the corporation of the United States
is without a People (State). Remember the word “state” has multiple meanings, and that we call the
United States district colloquially as Òthe state,Ó just as in OrwellÕs Þctional government of Ninteen-

!1016
Eighty-Four was as well “the superstate,” complete with its “Ministry of Truth” that was
responsible for historical revisionism and propaganda and for its use of a language known as
Newspeak or “English Socialism,” nicknamed as IngSoc. Sound familiar?

But let us verify this through court record, so that no doubt or patriotic, public-minded non-sense
remains:

—=—

“We therefore decline to overrule the opinion of Chief Justice Marshall,

and we hold that THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IS NOT A STATE
WITHIN ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONSTITUTION. In other words, cases
between citizens of the District and those of the states were not
included of the catalogue of controversies over which the Congress
could give jurisdiction to the federal courts by virtue of Article 3.”




Paraphrase (not sourced) : “In other words, CONGRESS HAS

EXCLUSIVE LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION OVER CITIZENS OF
WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA and through their plenary
power NATIONALLY COVERS THOSE CITIZENS EVEN WHEN IN
ONE OF THE SEVERAL STATES AS THOUGH THE DISTRICT
EXPANDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGULATING ITS CITIZENS
WHEREVER THEY GO THROUGHOUT THE STATES IN UNION.”



—National Mutual Insurance Company of the District of Columbia v. Tidewater Transfer Company, 337 U.S. 582, 93 L.Ed. 1556 (1948)

—=—

“The term "District Courts of the United States," as used in the rules,
without an addition expressing a wider connotation, has its historic
signiÞcance. IT DESCRIBES THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS
CREATED UNDER ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONSTITUTION. COURTS
OF THE TERRITORIES ARE LEGISLATIVE COURTS, properly
speaking, AND ARE NOT DISTRICT COURTS OF THE UNITED
STATES. We have often held that vesting a territorial court with
jurisdiction similar to that vested in the District Courts of the United
States DOES NOT MAKE IT A "DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES." Reynolds v. United States, 98 U. S. 145, 98 U. S. 154, etc.”
—Mookini v. United States, 303 U.S. 201 (1938)

—=—

"Territorial courts are legislative courts, created in virtue of the general

right of SOVEREIGNTY WHICH EXISTS IN THE GOVERNMENT, or
in virtue of that clause which enables Congress to make all needful

!1017
 rules and regulations respecting the territory BELONGING TO THE
UNITED STATES. THE JURISDICTION WITH WHICH THEY ARE
INVESTED IS NOT A PART OF THAT JUDICIAL POWER WHICH IS
DEFINED IN THE THIRD ARTICLE OF THE CONSTITUTION, BUT
IS CONFERRED BY CONGRESS, in the execution of those general
powers WHICH THAT BODY POSSESSES OVER THE TERRITORIES
OF THE UNITED STATES.”
—9 Federal Statutes, Annotated, 212

—=—

“A citizen of the United States is A CITIZEN OF THE FEDERAL

GOVERNMENT and at the same time a citizen of the State in which he
RESIDES. Determination of what is qualiÞed residence within a State is
not here necessary. SufÞce it to say that one possessing such double
citizenship OWES ALLEGIANCE AND IS ENTITLED TO
PROTECTION FROM EACH SOVEREIGN TO WHOSE
JURISDICTION HE IS SUBJECT.”
—Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383 (1953)

—=—

Imagine a continually morphing, undulating amoeba. Wherever one travels as a US districted

(seized), domestic citizen-ship, the tendrils of that amoeba precede our trespass there, for a United
States citizen-ship may only exist inside of the amoeba, inside the United States jurisdiction. Thus
generally, the citizen-ship is not allowed to travel upon private lands, only public (US) trust
property. This is again the difference between a State (private) and a national (public) citizen. Each
are foreign sovereignties from the other.

FOREIGN - That which BELONGS TO ANOTHER COUNTRY; that which is STRANGE. 2.

Every nation is foreign to all the rest, AND THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN
UNION ARE FOREIGN TO EACH OTHER, WITH RESPECT TO THEIR MUNICIPAL
LAWS. 3. But the reciprocal relations between the national government and the several
states composing the United States are not considered as foreign, BUT DOMESTIC.
(Bouv1856)

—=—

We must be clear here that these administrative courts, which are often referred to as part of the
“administrative state,” are more accurately to be called as agencies, and are created not by the
constitution under Article 3, but by the “Revised Codes” as statute law of the legislatures of each
state. US citizenships have no right or privilege under common law, and should not be fooled into
believing in the legitimate or de jure nature of such administrative, executive de facto courts of
agency steeped in admiralty/maritime law, the law of the ßag (Arms) of nations. Public persons are
municeps, and municeps attend municipal courts (i.e., holding courts). So if you ever hear a judge
issue a warrant for the arrest of a person, this is an executive act, not a judicial one. There are no
judicial courts reserved for US citizenships, and there has not been since the civil war. The common
law is reserved for the bearers of private Arms, not for the voluntary subjects enfranchised under

!1018
contract of citizenship to those private People through their holding company the United States.
And here we Þnd the difference between what is the States (People) in union, and what each of
those several (private) States established to administer foreign citizenships of the United States.
Oregon, the State (private People), created the administrative ÒstateÓ to control commercial vessels
of the United States district, which means that on top of the land lies a secondary, public govern-
mental structure, a jurisdiction of administrative agencies organized as a Federal Municipal Corp-
oration. It pretends statehood, despite the fact that the District of Columbia (Federal government)
is not considered as an actual State (having no People), and being in totality a creation of congress
(representatives of the States/People) assembled and totally under its authority. And so to put it as
vulgarly as possible, the states governments are merely holding corporations, plantations for public
servants, the State (People) being their master through Federal, administrative jurisdiction. The
tendrils of the Federal amoeba extend to all territories not granted to private citizens of each State,
which are called as public lands in trust.

One other aspect is to research the fact that all of these agencies and their agents are municipal
corporations in nature. How do we know this? Simple, we look at their tax information. And what
we Þnd is a FEDERAL TAX ID NUMBER attached to every state municipal and district court, to
every Justice of the Peace court and every circuit court, and every superior and supreme court.
Even the so-called Òstate courtÓ has this federal ID. In other words, all these courts have only de
facto (executive/military) existence as federal, United States, administrative district courts. None of
them are in the private States. None of them are common law jurisdictions or Article 3 courts as
constitutional creations. They are purely commercial, administrative courts set up for the control
and exaction of commercial agents (strawmen).

So let us be clear here. The Supreme Court of the United States is a constitutional court. All other
courts have been federally created by acts of congress, and exist only under the Department of
Justice (DOJ), which is not under the now defunct Judicial Branch but the Executive Branch of the
President. In other words, there are only two branches of government that US citizenships are ever
generally in intercourse with, for this simulation of ÒjusticeÓ has nothing to do with any legitimate,
constitutional, Judicial Branch entity, judge (magistrate), or court. This further shows the fact that a
United States citizenship is never actively participating in any private capacity in any State, and
that all agencies we deal with in public persona are Federal (stateless) and purely administrative
(unconstitutional/commercial) in nature. Again, while we may call the United States as the state,
this is not an ofÞcial moniker, and is more of a homage to OrwellÕs 1984 version of the ad-
ministrative, militarized, executive Òstate.Ó We never set foot in any State, for the amoeba of federal
US jurisdiction continuously surrounds and ÒprotectsÓ our persons as property bound by the legal
chains of voluntary servitude, with us in tow through the binding chains of the performance debt
of surety. And this reafÞrms the legal fact (conÞrmed and ratiÞed lie) that legal state (municipal
corporation) law is always trumped by federal law regarding US citizenships, for all courts are as
well merely federal municipal corporations without (outside of) the common law and certainly
without the Law of Jehovah, for all this is purely a legal (anti-God) Þction, the United States being
just another artiÞcial person (corporation).

—=—

"The supreme court of the United States IS A CONSTITUTIONAL COURT.

ALL OTHER FEDERAL COURTS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED BY ACTS
OF CONGRESS, pursuant to authority granted by the constitution of the
United States, and, BEING COURTS PROVIDED FOR BY LEGISLATIVE,
AND NOT DIRECTLY BY CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY, THE
CONGRESS MAY ENACT ANY LAWS IT DEEMS WISE FOR THE
CONDUCT AND OPERATION OF SUCH COURTS."
—STATE EX REL. N.W. OYSTER CO. v. MEAKIM, 34 Wn.(2d) 131, 138 (July 14, 1949)

—=—

!1019
 —=—

“When this court has once decided a question of law, that decision,
when the question arises again, IS NOT ONLY BINDING ON ALL
INFERIOR COURTS IN THIS STATE, BUT IS BINDING ON THIS
COURT UNTIL THAT CASE IS OVERRULED.”
—Duffy v. Blake, 94 Wash. 319, 162 Pac. 521; Guarantee Trust Co. v. Scoon, 144 Wash. 33, 256 Pac. 74" GODEFROY v. REILLY, 146 Wash. 257, 259 (January
3, 1928)

—=—

"At the outset, we reafÞrm our recognition of the authority of the United
States Supreme Court to act as THE FINAL ARBITER of controversies
arising under the federal constitution. In all matters touching UPON
FEDERAL RIGHTS, the United States Supreme Court may review state
court decisions."
—See Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.) 304, 4 L. Ed. 97 *1816) (authority to review state civil cases); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264, 5 L.
Ed. 257 (1821) (authority to review state criminal cases). STATE v. CHRISMAN, 100 Wn.2d 814, 816, 676 P.2d 419 [No. 46750-1. En Banc. January 26, 1984.]

—=—

“[1] CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (24)–COURTS (38)–PRESUMPTIONS–

RULES OF DECISION–UNITED STATES COURTS: Upon Federal
questions statutes will be PRESUMED constitutional and valid unless
clearly to the contrary; and the decisions of the United States supreme
court ARE BINDING ON STATE COURTS… We are FIRMLY BOUND
TO CONFORM to the decisions of the United States supreme court
upon such questions as any Federal or other court."
—GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY v. STATE, 147 Wash. 630, 637 [Nos. 21092, 21093. En Banc. May 8, 1928]

—=—

"STATE COURTS MUST FOLLOW THE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE

FEDERAL CONSTITUTION MADE BY THE UNITED STATES
SUPREME COURT."
—STATE v. LAVIOLLETTE, 118 Wn.2d 670, 826 P.2d 684 [No. 58076-6. En Banc. March 19, 1992]

—=—

ÒDecisions of the United States Supreme Court ARE CONTROLLING

OVER CONFLICTING CASE LAW AND STATUTORY LAW OF THIS
STATE."
—STATE v. COUNTS, 99 Wn.2d 54, 659 P.2d 1087 [Nos. 47687-0, 48239-0, 47932-1. En Banc. February 24, 1983]

—=—

!1020
 —=—

“The Supreme Court’s resolution of an issue of state law

CONSTITUTES BINDING PRECEDENT until the Supreme Court
overrules it."
—HAMILTON v. LABOR & INDUS., 111 Wn. 2d 569, 761 P.2d 618 [No. 54621-5. En Banc. September 22, 1988]

—=—

“A Supreme Court holding CONSTITUTES BINDING AUTHORITY

THAT MAY NOT BE OVERRULED by the Court of Appeals."
—STATE v. WILLIAMS, 93 Wn. App. 340, 969 P.2d 106 (December 4, 1998.)

—=—

If you haven’t quite put the pieces together yet, we are back to the doctrine of master and servant.
For the Supreme Court of the United States is god. ItÕs words are Þnal, indefatigable, and infallible
until it alters its own artiÞcial, syndicalist, consensus-based opinion. There simply are no in-
dependent state courts for public persons (municeps). And this is why so many gurus fail in their
endeavors of paper terrorism. For it is never realized by such public-minded fools that each legal
state government is a municipal corporation and territorial possession of the United States. And
this is why the difference between these similar but not the same terms of art, State and state, must
be comprehended and understood before one attempts to go against an indestructible (sovereign)
foe while acting in that foeÕs proprietary status of personhood. There are no applicable private or
StatesÕs rights when it comes to federal citizenships. There are no rights at all for slaves but what is
agenticly granted by their master and principal. Public persons are not the People of the several
(private/foreign) States united. And no state law can ever protect a US citizenship from US law.

The most important aspect of this is that as US citizenships under contract with the United States,
we must remember not to use or count on common law concepts and maxims (principles) to save
us, and that certainly includes the Bible and its Natural Law.Remember, the contract makes the law.
There are no unalienable, God-given rights for the persons (property) of government. Slaves may
demand nothing but what the law of their master proclaims or beneÞcently gives remedy for. This
is the outline of a modern feudal system, make no mistake. The feud has merely been redeÞned
and hidden behind what is styled as the ÒFederal AreasÓ of the landholders (Lords) of the Private
States.



What is a creation of congress is not a creation of the constitution. And remember, congress
assembled re-created themselves as a legal entity of the United States under Title 2 of US Code.
Congress assembled and created the corporate United States ÒCongress.Ó When working for the
several States, they are congress assembled, the creators of and sovereign entity over the United
States. When working and being paid by the federal United States under this federal, municipal
ofÞce of the district they created, they are employees (members) of the United States and paid as
such.

If this still isnÕt registering, consider this. The so-called founding fathers, when they came together
as ÒCongress AssembledÓ to hash out the US constitution, were not paid for their efforts. When
congress acts in its de jure (legitimate) form of Òthe united States in Congress AssembledÓ they are
not paid by the United States because they are the united States (People), they as a body are the 50
States/People (representatives) united. When they act as de facto (illegitimate/unconstitutional)
municipal congressmen overseeing their own creation of the corporation called the United States,
they are paid for their lesser employments as members thereof. These are two different hats.
Congress Assembled is the boss of the United States congress, one the incorporated legal,
commercial simulation of the other, as the anti-congress.

!1021
 —=—

“110(d) The term "State" includes any Territory or possession of the

United States.”

“11(e) The term "Federal Area" means any lands or premises held or
acquired by or for the use of the United States or ANY DEPARTMENT,
ESTABLISHMENT, OR AGENCY OF THE UNITED STATES; and any
Federal area, or any part thereof, which is located within the EXTERIOR
BOUNDARIES of any State, SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE A FEDERAL
AREA LOCATED WITHIN SUCH STATE."
—Sections from the “Buck Act,” coded as 4 U.S.C.S. Secs. 105-113

—=—

**I wish to pay special recognition and thanks here to the many herein unnamed folks that have researched,
collected, and posted freely as I have for so many years, such cases and quotes for the likes of myself and
others to Þnd, verify, utilize, and build upon. Many of the above few pages of collected, well researched quotes
comes from collections made by one Luis Ewing with thanks. I hope that my own work may be as useful to
others.

The States (People) created the state constitutions upon the territories held in US trust by this
Federal holding company called the United States (a creation of those same People/States), so why
would anyone think that a stateless person of the District of Columbia might be a party to those
People’s (State’s) negative constitutional restrictions and protections? To act within a US citizen-
ship is to exist within a slave-holding company as a bonded agent in surety. No employee (agent) is
his own master, and certainly not the holder of that which employs it. It is to be in a state of
transience, a temporary disposition of being without land for the length of one’s attachment to that
legalistic public persona, caught up in the spiritual death of the pursuit of mammon in civil life.
When a man is separated from the land, from his Source, having no blood connection and
inheritance to it, his spirit is lost. His Life force is dead to God (Nature) and his deeds without True
purpose therein. His Natural and self-evident Dependence to God is illusionary replaced by an
artiÞcially induced dependence on within the artiÞcial matrix (womb) of the state. He has been
seized by the distress and distraint of Caesar. He has been personiÞed and districted into oblivion.

DISTRAIN - TO TAKE AS A PLEDGE PROPERTY OF ANOTHER, AND KEEP IT UNTIL

HE PERFORMS HIS OBLIGATION or until the property is replevied by the sheriff. It was
used TO SECURE AN APPEARANCE IN COURT, PAYMENT OF RENT, PERFORMANCE
OF SERVICES, etc. Also, any detention of personal property, whether lawful or unlawful,
for any purpose. DISTRESS is now generally used. (Black4)

DISTRAINER, DISTRAINOR - He who SEIZES a distress. (Black4)

DISTRAINT - SEIZURE; the act of distraining or making a distress. (Black4)

DISTRESS - THE TAKING A PERSONAL CHATTEL OUT OF THE POSSESSION OF A

WRONG-DOER INTO THE CUSTODY OF THE PARTY INJURED, TO PROCURE A
SATISFACTION FOR A WRONG COMMITTED; as for non-payment of rent, or injury
done by cattle. THE TAKING OF BEASTS OR OTHER PERSONAL PROPERTY BY WAY
OF PLEDGE, TO ENFORCE THE PERFORMANCE OF SOMETHING DUE FROM THE
PARTY DISTRAINED UPON. The taking of a defendant's goods, in order to compel an
appearance in court. The seizure of personal property to enforce payment of taxes, to be

!1022
followed by its public sale if the taxes are not voluntarily paid; also the thing taken by
distraining, THAT WHICH IS SEIZED TO PROCURE SATISFACTION. And in old Scotch
law, a pledge taken by the sheriff from those attending fairs or markets, TO SECURE THEIR
GOOD BEHAVIOR, and RETURNABLE to them at the close of the fair or market if they
had been guilty of no wrong. (Black4)

DISTRESS INFINITE - One that has no bounds with regard to its quantity, and may be
repeated from time to time, until the stubbornness of the party is CONQUERED. Such are
distresses for fealty or suit of court, and for compelling jurors to attend. A power of
ATTORNEY by which LANDLORD DELEGATES EXERCISE OF HIS RIGHT to his duly
authorized AGENT. (Black4)

DISTRESS WARRANT - A writ authorizing an ofÞcer to make a distraint; particularly, a writ

authorizing THE LEVY OF A DISTRESS ON THE CHATTELS OF A TENANT for non-
payment of rent. (Black4)

WRIT OF GRAND DISTRESS - A writ formerly issued in the real action of quare impedit,
when NO APPEARANCE HAD BEEN ENTERED after the attachment; it commanded the
sheriff TO DISTRAIN THE DEFENDANT'S LANDS AND CHATTELS IN ORDER TO
COMPEL APPEARANCE. It is no longer used, having abolished the action of quare impedit,
and SUBSTITUTED FOR IT the procedure in an ORDINARY ACTION. (Black4)

SECOND DISTRESS - A supplementary distress for rent in arrear, allowed by law in some
cases, where the goods seized under the Þrst distress are not of sufÞcient value to satisfy the
claim. (Black4)

DISTRESS AND DANGER - The "distress" and "danger" to which a ship needs to be
exposed to entitle its rescuer TO SALVAGE NEED NOT BE ACTUAL OR IMMEDIATE, OR
THE DANGER IMMINENT AND ABSOLUTE. It is sufÞcient if at the time the assistance is
rendered, the ship has encountered any damage or misfortune which might possibly expose
her to destruction if the services were not RENDERED, or if a VESSEL is in a situation of
actual apprehension though not of actual danger. (Black4)

SALVAGE - noun - [Latin salvus, salvo.] In commerce, a reward or recompense allowed by law
for the saving of a ship, OR GOODS FROM LOSS AT SEA, either by shipwreck or other
means, or by ENEMIES OR PIRATES. Salvage, for savage, not used. [See Savage.] (Webs1828)

SAVAGE - adjective - [Latin silva, a wood, or silvicola, an inhabitant of a wood, or silvaticus.] 1.

Pertaining to the forest; wild; remote from human residence and improvements;
uncultivated; as a savage wilderness. Cornels and savage berries of the wood. 2. Wild;
UNTAMED; as savage beasts of prey. 3. UNCIVILIZED; UNTAUGHT; unpolished; rude; as
savage life; savage manners. What nation since the commencement of the christian era,
EVER ROSE FROM SAVAGE TO CIVILIZED WITHOUT CHRISTIANITY? 4. Cruel;
barbarous; Þerce; ferocious; inhuman; brutal; AS A SAVAGE SPIRIT. - noun - 1. A HUMAN
BEING IN HIS NATIVE STATE OF RUDENESS; ONE WHO IS UNTAUGHT,
UNCIVILIZED OR WITHOUT CULTIVATION OF MIND OR MANNERS. The savages (i.e.
indians) of America, WHEN UNCORRUPTED BY THE VICES OF CIVILIZED MEN, are
remarkable for their hospitality to strangers, and for their TRUTH, FIDELITY AND
GRATITUDE to their friends, but implacably cruel and revengeful towards their enemies.
From this last trait of the savage character, the word came to signify, 2. A man of extreme,
unfeeling, brutal cruelty; a barbarian. 3. The name of a genus of Þerce voracious ßies. - verb
transitive - To make wild, barbarous or cruel. [Not well authorized and little used.] (Webs1828)

BASTARDY - noun - A state of being a bastard, or begotten and BORN OUT OF LAWFUL
WEDLOCK, which CONDITION DISABLES THE PERSON FROM INHERITING AN
ESTATE. (Webs1828)
—=—

!1023
Savages need to be saved by these pirates by salvaging us at birth when we are informed on and
abandoned to the sea of commerce in mammon, and savages in captivity (nativity) certainly can’t
be trusted to hold land. The common bastard class in citizen-ship, like the entrained Tarzan after
his captivity (nativity), is the tamed and civilized savage class, considered as unregenerate
bastards.

You see, these “civilized” men through their legal means truly believe they are saving us from our
very own “human” nature, as a factory farmer saves a newborn calf by unnaturally separating it
from its mother and chaining it to an artiÞcial feeder, proÞting off of each head they salvage within
their capitalist system, and claiming that we can only be saved by their absolutely twisted version of
legalized, civil, Romanized paganism called by them as the legal ßattering title of ÒChristianityÓ
under a ÒChristian nation.Ó A clever trick of words to be sureÉ By corrupting men from Living in
Truth, Þdelity, and gratitude with each other under the blessings of God in Nature and without the
artiÞce of a legal system, man is somehow to be better off as subjects of a totally corrupt system of
the false law of these false saviors. But most important, since these gods are the enemies of all
people except their own blood kin, it is of the utmost importance to teach the vulgar commonality of
brutes and mean barbarians to somehow love their enemies; their captors. This is of course taken
from the similar but quite different idea laid out in the Bible. We are being saved (salvaged) by the
legal gods of the state, like cargo found adrift at sea and taken as booty, and we are expected to
thank that false “god” (the People) for such a privilege as this, even as we pledge allegiance to the
pirate ßag (Arms) of the district and to the republic (sovereign State/People) for which that ßag
stands representing our land-lords as the creator gods, but certainly not in any way directed at
Jehovah. For God receives, needs, or respects any such oath or Þctional contract, and such a dead
pledge would be an absolute redundancy if GodÕs Word were followed utterly. A contract is only
the devilÕs tool, and can only represent and prove a lack of the Law of Nature. Only artiÞcial things
require proof of pledge and fealty. Only frail men need the oaths of strong ones so that they may,
through binding word magic, deÞle that un-defeat-able strength. Only devils need a contract to
have any power over spiritual men. For a devil cannot be trusted in any promise he makes, and
manÕs promises (vows) to God cannot be considered as legitimate when promised through the
devilÕs artiÞce and trickery of personhood. A person may only pray (plead) to legal magistrates (the
gods and administrators of persons), but never to Jehovah. The devil has no power over man
without Þrst binding him by words and by fooling him into believing in the sacred (secretly
cursed) quality and character of those legally protected words, thus inciting him to suffer the will
and tyranny of a dark master.

And we are trained to call this darkness as light.

Yet, the love spoken about by christ in the scriptures had nothing to do with conforming with one’s
enemyÕs system of artiÞce of law that stands as opposed to GodÕs Law of Nature. In fact, the whole
point is to Love the man but hate his artiÞce, for manÕs only True enemy is Þction. Without Þctions
of (belonging to and protected by) law, all men are indeed Created Equal in our untainted Origin
(Source). Without trickery, without names and delusional ßattering titles, no man can rule over
another. For he must not only trick the slave, he must fool and pay others to support such slavery
so as to be guards (agents) over them. When christ violently threw over the tables of the money-
changers he did so in hatred for his enemy, which was that design of mammon and its power over
the minds of men. But he only did so in the purest Love; for those men were tricked by the enemy
that is the temptation towards Þction. Only the titles and persons of man are manÕs enemy, for the
man never acts as his True Self while acting in the name of another, though his actions are certainly
his alone to bear before GodÕs judgement. These legal gods (titles of men) demand the false love
(belief) of their subjects (persons) by oath of fealty at all costs and in all points of law regarding
their falsely promulgated superiority and sovereignty. They demand that the money-changers be
respected by the legalized, nationalized ÒChristiansÓ even as the whole of the population is drown-
ing in their debt instruments and against the self-evident, spiritual teachings of christ. For the gods
of the state are the only creators of this money monopoly, and the money-changers are only their
agents (bankers) acting on behalf of their principal government. The more debt created by the
agent, the more taxes and investment potential are created from that debt for the principal.

!1024
Nowhere does christ say love thy neighbor’s fraud. He says only to love and treat they neighbor as
an untainted, completely Equal man like thyself, despite his lies and self-deceit and not because of
them.

CHANGER - An ofÞcer formerly belonging to the king's mint, in England, whose business
was chießy to exchange coin for bullion brought in by merchants and others. (Black4)

CHANGER - noun - 1. ONE WHO ALTERS THE FORM OF ANY THING. 2. One that is
EMPLOYED in CHANGING AND DISCOUNTING MONEY; A MONEY-CHANGER. 3.
One given to change. (Webs1828)

—=—

Money cannot be capitalized upon unless it is in a constant state of ßux, where its value changes
with each passing day and its comparative value to foreign currencies never balances. The illusion
of competition is continuously maintained by media manipulation and pretended scarcities of
commodities. There is certainly nothing random about these cycles of change, which are controlled
utterly by these change-agents, who through seignorage and other schemes continuously scrape
gains from these small but ever-present changes.

Make no mistake, the money-changers change you into money, into a valuation of mammon, and
into a vessel of commerce for its use. This is the greatest of all these devil’s trickery. And this
artiÞcial form considered without substance relies strictly on your denial of God and Its Law,
denial of your very own Nature and Source. Mammon (valuation in money) as Þction can only exist
without spirituality, without the Law of Nature (Reality).

So how do we know for certain that the United States and other nations are not the temples of God
they claim to be as “Christian” nations? The answer is so simple that only a completely brain-
washed, cult-like society could possibly miss the clues. For the nations are the creators of money,
and house and protect the tables and corporations (artiÞcial persons) of the money-changers. The
temple of the Federal Reserve and US Treasury and Mint is the epitome of the money-changers
setting up shop in what they pretend to be GodÕs temple, one nation under the god of mammon.
No right-minded man could possibly mistake the United States government as that which is in the
favor of christ (the Son/Law/Word of Jehovah). For this nation as all others is only a customs
house for creation and taxation of commerce and merchandise. It would take a nuclear bomb for
christ to overturn the corruption of this temple built by hands. And yet all men residing within its
Þctional grasp and borders could rise up and be born-again from that dead civil life of citizenship in
captivity (nativity) in three days just as christ did, and would if they were actually following and
acting in their whole Being as the Son (Word/Law) of God and abandoning such Þctional things.
For the money-changers and merchants of the invisible sea may only inhabit the artiÞcial temples
of masonry, not the temples of God that is each of us in Nature and under Its Law are in our
spiritual Being.

—=—

“And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves,
and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of
small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the
oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;
And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; MAKE
NOT MY FATHER'S HOUSE AN HOUSE OF MERCHANDISE.”
—John 2: 14-16, KJB

—=—

!1025
It is only when we come to the comprehension that, not the man but the strawman, as the person
(property) of the United States, is actually considered as a tradable, commercial merchandise, that
we can really understand the above verse personally. This is to say, that we attend church, calling it
the Father’s House, while acting in surety and agency for the merchandise of the legal (anti-God)
state. When we attend church in public worship (in citizen-SHIP) we are doing so as merchants
(commercial vessels) of the state. We are appearing as and in the name of legal (anti-God) persons,
not men of God. This is a dishonor and a blasphemy to Jehovah and towards the teachings of
christ, and yet we generally have no idea we are doing so. This is one of the most important aspects
of the prophesied strong delusion.

MERCHANT - noun - [Latin mercor, to buy.]… 3. A SHIP IN TRADE… - verb intransitive - To

trade. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

MERCHANT - verb intransitive - To trade. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

MERCHANDRY - noun - Trade; commerce. [Not in use.] (Webs1828)

MERCHANDISE - noun - 1. The objects of commerce; wares, goods, commodities, whatever

is usually bought or sold in trade. But provisions daily sold in market, horses, cattle, and fuel
are not usually included in the term, and real estate never. 2. Trade; trafÞck; commerce. - verb
intransitive - To trade; to carry on commerce. (Webs1828)

MERCHANTMAN - noun - A ship or vessel employed in the transportation of goods, as

distinguished from a ship of war. (Webs1828)

—=—

Remember, in the legal realm, including within these incorporated, 501 non-proÞt religions, charity
is a regulated commercial practice. Here ÒcharityÓ is a ßattering title, not True Charity. Being tax-
exempt does not mean being exempt from and unlimited by legal law, conditions, and districting.
IN other words, these corporate churches are not sanctuaries of God, but merely the deceivingly
decorated temples of mammon.

If, for some reason, this isn’t abundantly clear, consider this: when you put a check into the
collection plate, whose name did you sign thereupon? Do you think that check of mammon is valid
without the consent of the legally assigned agent in commerce and only by its full signature,
including that of the legal surname?

The creation of the legal entity at birth represents a distress, a seizure of the child by the legal,
intangible hands of the district of the United States, a prize found at sea (in commerce) created by
the commercial intercourse of legal (illegitimate) marriage or other form of adulterous bastardy
(producing/issuing illegitimate children). And this attachment to the state and its public law
ensures (in surety) that the child will be educated in proper form to beneÞt its principal without
any regard or comprehension of its legal agency relationship. For as a ward of the state, the state is
required to educate the child.

In the following deÞnition, the word ÒchildÓ is not in reference to the actual Living boy or girl, only
to the legal status (person-hood) called in noun (name) form as a Òchild,Ó a Þction (creation) of
legal law. Form without substance. The boy or girl (the man) is only Þlling an ofÞce called Òchild.Ó
In other words, a “child” is an it, a thing, a property, not a he or she.

—=—

“In a contest for the POSSESSION OF A CHILD, the welfare of the

child is the controlling consideration. The father will be GIVEN the

!1026
 custody of IT, UNLESS he is shown to be unÞt or incompetent for that
OFFICE, or unless the welfare of the child DEMANDS A DIFFERENT
DISPOSITION.”
ÑDeÞnition of ÔChild,Õ referencing: Re Scarritt, 76 Mo. 565, 584 (1883), cases. (WCA1889)

—=—

ÒAll PERSONS born or naturalized in the United States, and SUBJECT

TO THE JURISDICTION thereof, ARE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED
STATES and of the state WHEREIN THEY RESIDE. No state shall make
or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of
citizens of the United States…”
Ñ14th amendment to the US constitution

—=—

“A CITIZEN OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IS NOT A CITIZEN

OF A STATE.”
ÑDeÞnition of ÔDistrict of ColumbiaÕ repeated from above (WCA1889)

—=—

ÒÔThe PeopleÕ DOES NOT INCLUDE U.S. CITIZENS.”




ÑBarron v. Mayor of & City Council of Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243, (paraphrase of Baron v. Mayer case cited below)

—=—

“The Citizens of each STATE shall be entitled to all PRIVILEGES and

IMMUNITIES of Citizens in the SEVERAL STATES.”
ÑArticle 4, Section 1, clause 2 of the United States constitution

—=—

These are not conßicting statements.

If a United States citizen-ship (a public, commercial vessel) is not a citizen of any of the private
(several) States, meaning not one of the actual bloodline of private People of each individual State,
and are thus only the peopled human capital of the United StatesÕ human capital management
system (district), then obviously the citizen-ships of the United States have no access to the
privileges and immunities entitled to those citizens of each private State. This clause only claims
that citizens of one private State will have the same (equal) privileges and immunities in any other
private (foreign) State he may enter, including the United States as a jurisdiction. Thus the private
citizen, as one that reserves all rights from the United States, is literally immune from the United
StatesÕ public law. But a United States public citizen-ship is a status (personhood) that is under the
authority of that private People and its created district, not over it like these private, reserved State
citizens are. They are the creators, we are their subjects in fealty and pledged allegiance. Big

!1027
difference… Of course this is just one of many illusions that the subjects of the United States in
citizen-ship carry as a mistaken identity, servants believing they are masters, agents believing they
are principals, as those who are so hopelessly enslaved by word-magic that they believe they are
Free.

Let us examine the opinion of the court delivered by Chef Justice Marshall so that we may better
grasp the fact that the constitution does not effect the State governments or the private People of
the States in their local government:

“The plaintiff in error contends that it comes within that clause in the Fifth Amendment to the
Constitution which inhibits the taking of PRIVATE PROPERTY for public use without just
compensation. He insists that this amendment, being in favor of the liberty of the citizen,
ought to be so construed as to restrain the legislative power of A STATE, AS WELL AS
THAT OF THE UNITED STATES. If this proposition be untrue, the court can take no
jurisdiction of the cause.”

ÒThe question thus presented is, we think, of great importance, but not of much difÞculty. The
Constitution was ordained and established BY THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THEMSELVES, FOR THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT, AND NOT FOR THE
GOVERNMENT OF THE INDIVIDUAL STATES. EACH STATE ESTABLISHED A
CONSTITUTION FOR ITSELF, and in that constitution PROVIDED SUCH LIMITATIONS
AND RESTRICTIONS on the powers of its particular government as its judgment dictated.
The people of the United States framed such a government for the United States as they
supposed best adapted TO THEIR SITUATION AND BEST CALCULATED TO PROMOTE
THEIR INTERESTS. The powers they conferred on this government were to be exercised by
itself, and the limitations on power, if expressed in general terms, are naturally, and we think
necessarily, applicable to the government created by the instrument. THEY ARE
LIMITATIONS OF POWER GRANTED IN THE INSTRUMENT ITSELF, NOT OF
DISTINCT GOVERNMENTS FRAMED BY DIFFERENT PERSONS AND FOR
DIFFERENT PURPOSES.”

“If these propositions be correct, THE FIFTH AMENDMENT MUST BE UNDERSTOOD AS

RESTRAINING THE POWER OF THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT, NOT AS
APPLICABLE TO THE STATES. In THEIR several Constitutions, THEY have imposed such
restrictions ON THEIR RESPECTIVE GOVERNMENTS, as their own wisdom suggested,
such as THEY deemed most proper for themselves. IT IS A SUBJECT ON WHICH THEY
JUDGE EXCLUSIVELY, and with which others interfere NO FURTHER than they are
supposed to have a common interest.”

—Page 32 U. S. 247, 248 of the case Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 32 U.S. 7 Pet. 243 243 (1833)

—=—

How many US citizen-ships have tried and failed miserably to claim in court that their property is
“private” property? How ridiculous of a concept this must be to the experienced judge when he
must deal with such nonsensical, false-patriotic rhetoric of such illiterate, public-minded beasts, of
those who falsely believe they are Free and private? It is always the State, not the nation, that takes
by eminent domain any private property of its private People. The tenants, the public persons of
the nation that may happen to dwell in residence and rent of that land have nothing to say in the
matter. In short, the constitution does not apply to US citizenships with regard to its protection
clauses over private land, simply because public persons are not private and cannot hold privately
any land!

Further information in this same case sheds ever more light on the fact that citizen-ships of the
United States corporation are not the same as the citizens of any private (several) State, and later
shows conclusively that cities and their inhabitants are corporations of public interest:

!1028
 “Syllabus: The provision in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
declaring that PRIVATE PROPERTY shall not be taken for PUBLIC USE without just
compensation is INTENDED SOLELY AS A LIMITATION ON THE EXERCISE OF POWER
BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES, AND IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE
LEGISLATION OF THE STATES…”

“This right was interfered with, and the beneÞt of this property taken away from the
plaintiff BY THE CORPORATION avowedly, as the defence showed, FOR PUBLIC USE,
FOR AN OBJECT OF PUBLIC INTEREST — the beneÞt more immediately of the
community of Baltimore, the individuals, part of the population of Maryland, KNOWN BY
THE CORPORATE TITLE OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE. THE
"INHABITANTS" OF BALTIMORE ARE THUS INCORPORATED BY THE ACTS OF 1796,
ch. 68. AS A CORPORATION, they are made liable to be sued, and authorized to sue, to
acquire and hold and dispose of property and, within the scope of the powers conferred by
the charter, are allowed to pass ordinance and legislative acts, which it is declared by the
charter shall have the same effect as acts of assembly, and be operative, provided they be not
repugnant to the laws of the state, or the constitution of the state, or of the United States.”

—Page 32 U. S. 243 of the case Barron v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 32 U.S. 7 Pet. 243 243 (1833)

—=—

Now, so that you fully under-stand, if you want to live within the corporate limited of the artiÞcial
person (municipal corporation) of “Baltimore,” you must comprehend that you are submitting
yourself (your strawman persona) to being a member of that corporation. Be very clear that
Baltimore is not a city, it’s a PERSON IN LAW. When the city of Baltimore goes to court, it appears
there as an artiÞcial person represented by its appointed agents (corporate attorneys). This is what
it means, in the Latin, to be a municep, to live publicly (legally/Þctionally) in the legal persona
(vessel/property) of commerce within a municipal corporation (district, city, county, state govern-
ment). Corporations are persons to. Never forget this. Never forget the lie you have volunteered to
live under. Never forget that the person (state/State) is god of its own creation (persons).

Of course the artiÞcial person that is the ÒBaltimore CorporationÓ may take private land regardless
of any national, public persons standing in public (permissive) residence upon that land (i.e.,
Þctionally, within that corporation) with just compensation on behalf of the State. And no US
constitutional protections apply, since the act is done outside of the United States district proper
and not on public lands. The State (corporation of “People”) owns the land because the State
created and owns the status and Allodial title to the land.

Again, we must learn our place in society, in the social contract. To appear in court with such
ßawed perspectives means we lose the case before it happens. For when we make a claim of
“truth” based on false ideals and patriotic delusions, as if we are one of the private People
protected by the constitution, then we are forever lost in our own idiocracy. When our ac accepted
truths are built on lies, on Þctions, then our pretended truths are cursed (held sacred).

But we must deÞne terms. If the constitution guarantees Immunity and Privileges only to citizens of
the several private States (e.g., the equal footing clause), then we must be clear of the meaning of
this distinction. For this can only mean that these private citizens of the private States have
privileges and immunities from (against) the constituted authorities and government that public
citizen-ships aren’t privy to.

However, as with eminent domain, a private State citizen is beholden to his own private law of
each private State. And so to be clear, the State is still that private citizen’s god (sovereign). His
privacy (a legal status) exists only by his subjection to this State. He is not a private man under
Jehovah (under Nature’s Law), and is certainly no follower of the Word (Son/Law) of god through
christ.

!1029
You see, the word privilege comes from the word private. Just as the word separate is similar to the
word several, or private. Only a private citizen can be in privilege. All other public citizenships,
though the term is certainly used, have no right of privacy, and so the privileges offered to public
persons are so in name only. Revokable franchise… In other words, the right to privacy of a public
person is an oxymoron. Public is not private. A public person can only claim the rights assigned to
it by government, whereas a private person can claim privilege (exemption) from those forced
public rights. The problem is that we think legal (anti-God) rights are a good thing. Thus we suffer
the right to be put in pain, punished, licensed, incarcerated, taxed, exacted, extorted, and a host of
many other legal rights that are in Truth only contractual obligations violently enforced upon
others. Only a private man may reserve his unalienable rights, which is just another expression for
the negative Law of God. Reservation of rights is a privilege against the enforcement of required,
foreign, public rights, or to be more accurate, to the contractual duties those assigned and
consented-to rights impose. Legal rights are a required imposition upon the disposition of a private
man acting purposefully in the agency of a public Þction. The strawman, like the scarecrow, is only
a subject of its creator, and a private man must give up his unalienable status in order to operate
under the name of that strawman, as the property of another.

PRIVILEGE - noun - [Latin privilegium; privus, separate, PRIVATE, and lex, LAW; originally a
PRIVATE LAW, some public act that regarded AN INDIVIDUAL.] 1. A particular and
peculiar beneÞt or advantage enjoyed by a person, company or society, BEYOND THE
COMMON ADVANTAGES OF OTHER CITIZENS. A privilege may be a particular right
granted by law or held by custom, or it may be AN EXEMPTION FROM SOME BURDEN
TO WHICH OTHERS ARE SUBJECT. The nobles of Great Britain have the privilege of
being TRIABLE BY THEIR PEERS ONLY. MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT AND OF OUR
LEGISLATURES HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF EXEMPTION FROM ARRESTS IN CERTAIN
CASES. The powers of a banking company are privileges granted by the legislature. He
pleads the legal privilege of a Roman. THE PRIVILEGE OF BIRTHRIGHT WAS A
DOUBLE PORTION. 2. Any peculiar beneÞt or ADVANTAGE, RIGHT OR IMMUNITY,
NOT COMMON TO OTHERS OF THE HUMAN RACE. Thus we speak of national
privileges, and civil and political privileges, which we enjoy above other nations. We have
ecclesiastical and religious privileges secured to us by our constitutions of government.
PERSONAL PRIVILEGES ARE ATTACHED TO THE PERSON; as those of embassadors,
peers, members of legislatures, etc. REAL PRIVILEGES ARE ATTACHED TO PLACE; as the
privileges of the king's palace in England. 3. Advantage; favor; beneÞt. A nation despicable by
its weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being neutral. Writ of privilege is a writ to deliver a
privileged person from custody when arrested in a civil suit. - verb transitive - To grant some
particular right or exemption to; to invest with a peculiar right or immunity; as, TO
PRIVILEGE REPRESENTATIVES FROM ARREST; to privilege the ofÞcers and students of
a college from military duty. 1. TO EXEMPT FROM ENSURE OR DANGER. This place doth
privilege me. (Webs1828)

ENSURE - And its derivatives. [See INSURE.] (Webs1828)

INSURE - verb transitive - inshu're. [IN and SURE.] To make sure or secure; TO CONTRACT
OR COVENANT for a consideration TO SECURE A PERSON against loss; or to engage to
indemnify another for the loss of any speciÞed property, at a certain stipulated rate per cent,
called a premium. The property usually insured is such as is exposed to extraordinary
HAZARD. THUS THE MERCHANT INSURES HIS SHIP OR ITS CARGO, OR BOTH,
AGAINST THE DANGERS OF THE SEA; houses are insured against Þre; sometimes
hazardous debts are insured, and sometimes lives. - verb intransitive - To underwrite; to
practice making insurance. This company insures at 3 per cent, or at a low premium.
(Webs1828)

UNDERWRITE - TO INSURE life or property. See Underwriter. To insure the sale of

corporate bonds or similar securities to the public by agreeing to buy those which are not
sold… (Black4)

!1030
 UNDERWRITE - verb transitive - [See Write.] 1. To write under something else. The change I
have made, I have here underwritten. 2. TO SUBSCRIBE. We whose names are underwritten,
agree to pay the sums expressed against your respective names. 3. TO SUBSCRIBE ONE'S
NAME FOR INSURANCE; to set one's name to a policy of insurance, FOR THE PURPOSE
OF BECOMING ANSWERABLE FOR LOSS OR DAMAGE, for a certain premium per cent.
Individuals underwrite policies of insurance, as well as companies. The broker who procures
insurance, ought not, by underwriting the policy, to deprive the parties of his unbiased
testimony. - verb intransitive - TO PRACTICE INSURING. (Webs1828)

WRITE - verb transitive preterit tense - wrote - participle passive - writ, written. [Latin] 1. TO
FORM by a pen on paper or other material, or by a graver on wood or stone; as, to write the
characters called letters; to write Þgures. We write characters on paper with pen and ink; we
write them on stone with a graving tool. 2. To express by forming letters and words on paper
or stone; as, to write a deed; to write a bill of divorcement. The ten commandments were
written with the Þnger of God on tables of stone. Exodus 31:1. 3. TO ENGRAVE. [See the
preceding deÞnition.] 4. TO IMPRESS durable. Write useful truths on the heart. 5. TO
COMPOSE OR PRODUCE, as an author. 6. TO COPY; TO TRANSCRIBE. 7. TO
COMMUNICATE BY LETTER. I chose to write the thing I durst not speak to her I lovd. - verb
intransitive - 1. To perform the act of forming characters, letters or Þgures, as representatives of
sounds or ideas. Learn to write when young. 2. To be employed as a clerk or an amanuensis. A
writes for B. D writes in one of the public ofÞces. 3. To play the author; as, he thinks, he
speaks, he writes, he sings. 4. To recite or relate in books. Josephus wrote of the wars of the
Jews. 5. To send letters. He wrote for all the Jews concerning their freedom. 6. TO CALL ONES
SELF; TO BE ENTITLED; TO USE THE STYLE OF. Those who began to write themselves
men, but thought it no shame to learn. 7. To compose; to frame or combine ideas and express
them in words. They can write up to the dignity and character of their authors. (Webs1828)

—=—

Legal persons are literally written (as graven images) into Þctional, legal existence and underwritten
(insured) before their undertaking in the districted commercial debtor’s hell.

To be clear, a private citizen of the several (private) States is exempt (in privilege from) being
required to carry a public strawman! In other words, a private citizen is not required to be surety
for anotherÕs person (ship) or to insure his adventures. A private citizen is exempt from insurance,
from being required to ensure anything, for he is not acting in the property and name and ßattering
(cog) title of another, and so needs no bond of insurance to protect such a use. He need not stand in
surety. Ultimately, this is the case only because the private citizen is exempt from adding the
underwritten surname (insured name) to his God-given name of origin (Source). His law is not
public. His person (status) is not property of the public (district/nation). His god is not the creator
of Þctional, public things, for he is of the body politic of his own creator god (State).

Note that our illustrious, prestigious leaders in legislature have almost total exemption from crime
in their ofÞcial capacity. They can simply do no legal wrong, for they are acting under a privileged
status, under diplomatic immunities. No man should have or be granted such privilege, such
power, such authority, nor should the common goy stand for such an outrage. But alas, history is
chock full of such sovereign rulers as these.

—=—

“A MINISTER OF STATE IS EXCUSABLE FOR THE HARM HE DOES

WHEN THE HELM OF GOVERNMENT HAS FORCED HIS HAND in a
storm; but in the calm he is guilty of all the good he does not do.”
—Le Siècle de Louis XIV, ch. VI: "État de la France jusqu’à la mort du cardinal Mazarin en 1661" (1752)

—=—

!1031
Is the reader really surprised to learn that the United States is merely a municipal corporation
called by the name of Washington, the District of Columbia? Neither a state nor a territory (not on
land), it is only an imaginary jurisdiction. To be in citizen-ship to such a Þctional place is to be
absent from and thus foreign to all other places, both Real and in Þction, including the several
(private/foreign) States. It is to be merely a ship on the sea of foreign commerce, ßoating in a sort
of permanent vagrancy as temporary residents, as unwitting carpet baggers upon the lands of a
foreign, pirating, usurious Private People. The legal creations (citizenships) of the United States
only have domain in that imaginary district, as the cartoon people of a cartoon realm, sent to
entertain their masters as the king’s fools in commerce and in idiocy.

In fact, the constitution tells us outright our place in each of the several (private) States, by referring
to us as merely “domestic” in our status of residence.

—=—

“...And [the United States] shall protect each of them (the States) against
Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive
(when the Legislature cannot be convened) AGAINST DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE.”
—Article 4, Section 4, Clause 2 of the United States constitution

—=—

Here we are left to wonder just what constitutes domestic violence? Just what is a ÒdomesticÓ any-
way and why is it distinguished here as something different from foreign invasion?

DOMESTIC - adjective - [Latin, A HOUSE.] 1. BELONGING TO THE HOUSE, or home;

PERTAINING TO ONE’S PLACE OF RESIDENCE, AND TO THE FAMILY; as domestic
concerns; domestic LIFE; domestic DUTIES; domestic affairs; domestic contentions; domestic
HAPPINESS; domestic WORSHIP. 2. Remaining much at home; living in retirement; as a
domestic man or woman. 3. Living near the habitations of man; TAME; NOT WILD; AS
DOMESTIC ANIMALS. 4. PERTAINING TO A NATION CONSIDERED AS A FAMILY,
OR TO ONE’S OWN COUNTRY; INTESTINE; NOT FOREIGN; as domestic troubles;
domestic dissensions. 5. MADE IN ONE’S OWN HOUSE, NATION OR COUNTRY; as
domestic manufactures. - noun - ONE WHO LIVES IN THE FAMILY OF ANOTHER, as a
chaplain or secretary. Also, A SERVANT OR HIRED LABORER, RESIDING with a FAMILY.
(Webs1828)

—=—

To be considered as “domestic” to any nation is to be considered not foreign to that nation. And if
one is domestic to any nation, one is certainly a foreigner to any State. One cannot be domestic to
both, just as man cannot have two masters. A public citizen-ship of a nation is not a private citizen
of any State (People).

In other words, the civil war was a domestic war, where the head (principal) of the household
(nation) kicked the shit out of those domestic subjects that sought to leave the very tyranny that, by
its Executively (unlawfully) declared civil war, reconquered and forced them into newly revised or
ÒreconstructedÓ legal state-government constitutions that require unwavering support of the
United States constitution without exception. And so yes, the mercenaries in this modern United
States military are no different from those Þghters of the civil war of their masters, today being only
more organized (uniformed) into a protective ordinance of the nation. Soldiers for hire will kill
those supposedly equal to themselves in civilian clothing as long as a ßattering title such as

!1032
“domestic terrorist” is placed upon us by that principal government, as the domestics called US
citizenships are easily renamed as foreigners called as “enemies” and “terrorists,” including those
different-skinned children and infants unable to yet utter such a word of art and war as “terror.”

This is not just some personal exercise of petty name-calling on this author’s account, for the use of
the word “mercenary” is merely a self-evident Truth, as a soldier-for-hire’s job description has
always been the same. He who prostitutes himself for money cannot be called anything else,
especially when one kills another man because of the Þctional ßag (Arms) he bears. To pretend that
killing a man is anything but what it is, as the pretended action of killing not a Creation of God but
a creation of some legal state with the ßattering titles of ÒenemyÓ or ÒinsurgentÓ are placed upon
that man’s person is the greatest delusion. It is the killing of Nature, the extinguishment of a part of
Jehovah. It is quite often that the True purveyors of terror, that being almost exclusively legal
governments under the law of nations, do so in the name of keeping peace through bloody conquest
and cold-blooded murder, even of those millions of unwitting and innocent women and children
that stand in the way. And todayÕs most destructive terrorists under the protection and uniform of
the United States military do so while ßying bomb-dropping, pilotless drones, the worst kind of
brainwashed and un-empathetic cowards controlling a video game joystick and Þre button with a
three-second delay of the carnage they cause in Real-time. Ironically, the public have been fooled
into believing (loving) another ßattering title placed upon those non-domestic terrorists, one that if
actually understood would not be used by the propagandists of war. To control the meaning of
words is to control the people who use them.

INSURGENT - adjective - [Latin insurgens; in and surgo, to rise.] In opposition to lawful civil
or political authority; as insurgent chiefs. - noun - A person who rises in opposition to civil or
political authority; one who openly and actively resists the execution of laws. [See
Insurrection.] AN INSURGENT DIFFERS FROM A REBEL. THE INSURGENT OPPOSES
THE EXECUTION OF A PARTICULAR LAW OR LAWS; THE REBEL ATTEMPTS TO
OVERTHROW OR CHANGE THE GOVERNMENT, OR HE REVOLTS AND ATTEMPTS
TO PLACE HIS COUNTRY UNDER ANOTHER JURISDICTION. All rebels are insurgents,
but all insurgents are not rebels. (Webs1828)

—=—

So who were the insurgents of the past?

All Americans against the Crown who fought in the insurgency against it.

All confederates who fought against the United States to attempt to win their freedom, being called
as rebels.

All militias that organize in protection of their own State against encroachment by national
authorities.

All True followers of christ that oppose any legal law and forced execution against themselves and
their fellow man.

And most relevant of all, itÕs the very common people of every country out there that Þght against
the occupying, murderous forces of the United States and other “allied” national mercenary
militaries, including the domestic citizenships of the United States.

The Articles of Confederation were very clearÉ

“III. The said STATES hereby SEVERALLY ENTER into a Þrm LEAGUE OF FRIENDSHIP
WITH EACH OTHER, for THEIR common defense, the security of THEIR liberties, and
THEIR mutual and general welfare, BINDING THEMSELVES TO ASSIST EACH OTHER,
against ALL force offered to, or attacks made upon THEM, or any of THEM, on account of
religion, SOVEREIGNTY, TRADE, or ANY other pretense whateverÉ

!1033
 “VI… NO TWO OR MORE STATES SHALL ENTER INTO ANY TREATY,
CONFEDERATION OR ALLIANCE WHATEVER BETWEEN THEM, without the consent
of the United States in Congress assembled, specifying accurately the purposes for which the
same is to be entered into, and how long it shall continue.”

—=—

Like the constitution, this agreement of “friendship” was between only the private (several) States
(People), and offers no friendship or negative protection to the common citizen-ship. Quite the
opposite, it’s an agreement to protect these Private People (States) from the commercially oriented
public they enslave and indenture. And when some of those States formed their own confederacy in
a several (private) conspiracy with each other and without permission of “Congress assembled,” it
was the “duty” of the “United States” to re-conquer (or purchase) those States (People) back into
the Union.

For those house-slaves out there that believe in (love) the “constitution,” yes indeed, this military
action is then and is today certainly “constitutional” in every way, shape, and form. This is because
no religious or moral law Exists by or under that constitution. God is absent from these “People,”
as proven not by their words but by their actions. That is to say that anything the “United States”
does to all but the private State citizens that created it is quite constitutional, for the constitution
only protects those who reserve all rights from its Caesar, from the district (distress, distraint, and
seizure) of the nation. The actions of the seat of government, the corporation called the United
States, are not bound by the constitution. ItÕs not alive. ItÕs a Þctional, artiÞcial person. Its law is the
law of nations, not the scriptures, and not the constitution. It’s a creation of and under Congress,
not of the constitution. As a nation, the command given by Lincoln by Executive Order to conquer
(re-purchase) that domestic hoard of the illiterate masses of each “confederate” state was and still is
a requirement of this nation’s (union of State’s) chartered compact. US citizen-ships are today as
then merely alien friends that may be declared instantly as the alien enemy of the nation. Our
commercial presence in the States is only allowed through our good standing in the United States
jurisdiction, our strawman, which can be severed from us at any time. And trust me, your
convenient little pocket constitution will not stop a bullet from a prostituting soldier’s rented
mercenary gun. That is, unless you are a private citizen of the private State (People); unless you
carry the artiÞcial, legally acquired white stone of a private State citizen.

—=—

“He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches;
TO HIM THAT OVERCOMETH will I give to eat of the hidden manna,
AND WILL GIVE HIM A WHITE STONE, AND IN THE STONE A
NEW NAME WRITTEN, WHICH NO MAN KNOWETH SAVING HE
THAT RECEIVETH IT.”
—Revelation 2:17, KJB

—=—

This Þgurative, parabolic teaching is not so mysterious as its prima facie appearance. For “in the
ancient courts of justice the accused were condemned by black pebbles (stones) and the
acquitted by white,Ó according to StrongÕs deÞnition of stone as revealed above (as #G5586 -
psēphos). To carry the white stone of government is not at all the same thing as carrying such a
righteous burden and duty of Natural Law in personal responsibility from God. To God is owed a
vow (promise) of duty and honor, while to the State is owed fealty and an oath to some Þctional
title of liege-lord (landlord). And so this notion of the carrying of the white stone of innocence or of
one not condemned (blackened/attainted), as one not a goyim and subject of the false law of any

!1034
condem-NATION and who carries the Þrst and only the Þrst christian name of God, is used here
(scripturally) as a parabolic symbol of he that has overcome the Þction and Lives only to serve
Jehovah. But the keepers of the secret hide this Truth from us under the rose, recreating their own
status (stone) in form without substance, as the ÒsovereigntyÓ of private landholders acting totally
against GodÕs Word. This artiÞcial white stone protects these private landholders from the sanctions
(punishments) of law, with very few exceptions (felony, treason, etc.). Of course that multitude of
marks and signs stemming from the origin of the matrix of a legal birth certiÞcate, and from it to
the voluntary conÞrmation and acquiring of the driverÕs license and Social Security number and
other identifying symbols, signs, marks, and beneÞts that now in biometrical form stem from that
matrix; these are all black stones upon our soul. We are black-balled from the eliteness of the
ÒsovereigntyÓ and their union. We are birthed into their district and governed by their commercial
law of Rome. They are what differentiate and judge us at birth as unspiritual, domestic beasts of
burden not worthy of saving. And yet these are the very black stones we have been taught from
birth and in public to signify as our delusional state Òfree-domÓ (franchise under anotherÕs
dominion) in our legal citizen-ships. What a laughable, cosmic joke on us all it is. For we actually
believe we will be ÒsavedÓ by the legal Þction and judgement over our pretended false id-entity of
the state, and that those mercilessly unconscious mercenaries of the militarized nation will bow
down to our non-sovereignty, blackened petition of pretended legal authority. We are a colony of
fools.

The United States, my friends, is our surrogate family. Like it or not we are lost to the state, treasure
found by the induced ignorance of our lineal ascendancy. We are the descendants of fools; men
educated to be slaves and to abandon their own children to the sea with every generation, throw-
ing us overboard to be found as ßotsam and jetsam with no known ownership (as infants of un-
known parentage). We are its children, actors in agency, and its children are merely domestics
resident in anotherÕs home.

How do we know this?

If the United States will protect the private (several) foreign States (as ÒWe, the PeopleÓ) from
domestic threats, then the domestics referred to can only be of the United StatesÕ family. In other
words, the domestics of each several State are all the United States citizenships residing there, for
their domicile is only of the United States district. And so we can see that the private States created
and amended the constitution not only to allow domestic servants to legally exist as citizenships in
this debtorÕs hell, but also to ensure and protect those landholders from being harmed by us if we
ever wake the hell up. In short, the constitution only protects the private People that are the citizens
of each private State, for they are the creators of our persons, and only they have reserved their
unalienable rights from the United States. Citizenships of the United States are under lien. We are
only ever domestics in whichever of the several States we reside in (without domicile).

Remember not to take these terms literally, only Þguratively in their legal meaning and false
authority. For a person is not of Reality, and so its domicile and its residence is not Reality either.
And the home or house, as a legal Þction representing the nation, is of course also only a Þgurative
word of legal description. Do, however, consider that this is the same feudal state of landholders
and public domestics that has existed in mansÕ history of empire.

To the States, we are domestic servants temporarily residing and working within their home and
territory.

DOMESTICS - THOSE WHO RESIDE IN THE SAME HOUSE WITH THE MASTER THEY
SERVE. The term does not extend to workmen or laborers employed out of doors. The Act of
Congress of April 30, 1790, s. 25, uses the word domestic in this sense. 2. Formerly, this word
was used to designate THOSE WHO RESIDED IN THE HOUSE OF ANOTHER,
HOWEVER EXALTED THEIR STATION, AND WHO PERFORMED SERVICES FOR HIM.
Voltaire, in writing to the French queen (in 1748, says) "Deign to consider, madam, that I AM
ONE OF THE DOMESTICS OF THE KING, and consequently yours, lily companions, the

!1035
 gentlemen of the king.” 3. Librarians, secretaries, and persons in such honorable employments,
would not probably be considered domestics, although they might reside in the house of their
respective employers. 4. Pothier, to point out the distinction between a domestic and a
servant, gives the following example: A literary man who lives and lodges with you, solely to
be your companion, that you may proÞt by his conversation and learning, is your domestic;
FOR ALL WHO LIVE IN THE SAME HOUSE and eat at the same table with the owner of
the house, are his domestics, but they are not servants. On the contrary, your Valet de,
chambre, TO WHOM YOU PAY WAGES, AND WHO SLEEPS OUT OF YOUR HOUSE, is
not, properly speaking, your domestic, but your servant. Vide Operative; Servant. (Bouv1856)

—=—

And so we can see that a domestic is one who Lives in another’s house (estate), not by wage but by
conversation and education. In other words, a domestic is a resident. But the domicile of any
resident of any of these private, several States (houses/families) is always Þrst made into a United
States citizen-ship, be it a permanent or temporary one. No foreigner may temporarily reside in
any state or attends any college in any state without establishing Þrst a permitted domicile in the
Þctional United States. The States created the United States for this purpose, so that all foreign
residents (which is every and all United States citizen-ship no matter how Òexalted their stationÓ
may be in their names, ßattering titles, and public statuses) are considered as alien friends, and in
the event of domestic disturbances or violence, can then be considered as alien enemies to be
federally removed, interned, or defeated (conquered) from those private estates like cattle. It’s not
so dissimilar to being removed from a bar for Þghting after a night of obscene drunkenness, for the
bar is the private house of the proprietor, and the customer is only a temporary resident (bar ßy)
occupying a station (bar stool) and conducting some commerce there (playing pool, conversing
with others, drinking, and perhaps trying to get meaninglessly laid in adultery). The friend of the
bar becomes the public enemy of the bar (association) when domestic violence breaks out and is
forcibly removed by his masterÕs executive police ofÞcer (sheriff) or by the local municipal corp-
oration security guards (hireling police) there at the bar (as mercenary agents for hire under color
of lesser police badges).

Ultimately, we must know our place. We must know where our domicile is. If it is not under God
(under Nature’s Sovereign Law) then we can only be under that of another’s dominion. Remember,
a citizen of the United States domicile is not a citizen of any State (domicile), and thus can only be a
resident in any other state or country compared to the United States. His home never changes, for
the created persona (status) of any citizen may only ever call its creator as home (domicile).

Being foreign and resident in any private State is similar to acting a part on a stage, a play-thing to
be used and abused by the People who produce, host, and direct us in voluntary servitude.


ACTOR SEQUITUR FORUM REI - According as rei is intended as the genitive of res, A
THING, or reus, A DEFENDANT, this phrase means: The plaintiff follows the forum of the
property in suit, or THE FORUM OF THE DEFENDANT'S RESIDENCE. (Black4)

DOMICIL - The place where a person has FIXED his ordinary dwelling, without a present
intention of removal. The law of domicil is of great importance in those countries where the
maxim "actor sequitur forum rei" is applied to the full extent. 2. A MAN CANNOT BE
WITHOUT A DOMICIL, for he is not supposed to have abandoned his last domicil UNTIL
HE HAS ACQUIRED A NEW ONE. Though by the Roman law a man might abandon his
domicil, and, until he acquired a new one, he was without a domicil. By Þxing his residence at
two different places a man may have two domicils at one and the same time; as, for example, if
a foreigner, coming to this country, should establish two houses, one in New York and the,
other in New Orleans, and pass one-half of the year in each; he would, for most purposes,
have two domicils. But it is to be observed that circumstances which might be held sufÞcient to
establish a commercial domicil in time of war, and a matrimonial, or forensic or political
domicil in time of peace, MIGHT NOT BE SUCH AS WOULD ESTABLISH A PRINCIPAL

!1036
 OR TESTAMENTARY DOMICIL, for there is a wide difference in applying the law of
domicil TO CONTRACTS AND TO WILLS. 3. There are three kinds of domicils, namely: 1.
THE DOMICIL OF ORIGIN. domicilium originis vel naturale. 2. THE DOMICIL BY
OPERATION OF LAW, OR NECESSARY DOMICIL. 3. DOMICIL OF CHOICE. 4. - §1. By
domicil of origin is understood THE HOME OF A MAN'S PARENTS, NOT THE PLACE
WHERE, THE PARENTS BEING ON A VISIT OR JOURNEY, A CHILD HAPPENS TO BE
BORN. DOMICIL OF ORIGIN IS TO BE DISTINGUISHED FROM THE ACCIDENTAL
PLACE OF BIRTH. 5. - §2. There are two classes of persons who acquire domicil by operation
of law. 1st. THOSE WHO ARE UNDER THE CONTROL OF ANOTHER, and to whom the
law gives the domicil of another. Among these are, 1. The wife. 2. The minor. 3. The lunatic.
2d. Those on whom the state afÞxes a domicil. Among this class are found, 1. THE OFFICER.
2. THE PRISONER. 6. - 1st. Among those who, being under the control of another, acquire
such person's domicil, are, 1. The wife. THE WIFE TAKES THE DOMICIL OF HER
HUSBAND, and the widow retains it, unless she voluntarily change it, or unless, she marry
a second time, when she takes the domicil of the second husband. A party may have two
domicils, the one actual, the other legal; the hushand's actual and the wife's legal domicil, are,
prima facie, one. THE DOMICIL OF THE MINOR IS THAT OF THE FATHER, OR IN
CASE OF HIS DEATH, OF THE MOTHER. The domicil of a lunatic is regulated by the same
principles which operated in cases of minors the domicil of such a person may be changed by
the direction, or with the assent of the guardian, express or implied. 7. The law afÞxes a
domicil. 1. Public ofÞcers, such as the president of the United States, the secretaries and such
other ofÞcers WHOSE PUBLIC DUTIES REQUIRE A TEMPORARY RESIDENCE AT THE
CAPITAL, RETAIN THEIR DOMICILS. Ambassadors preserve the domicils which they have
in their respective countries, and this privilege extends to the ambassador's family. OfÞcers,
soldiers, and marines, in the service of the United States (as in deployment and station in
foreign countries), do not lose their domicils while thus employed. 2nd. A prisoner does not
acquire a domicil where the prison is, nor lose his old. 8. The domicil of origin, which has
already been explained, REMAINS UNTIL ANOTHER HAS BEEN ACQUIRED. In order to
change such domicil; there must be an actual removal with an intention to reside in the
place to which the party removes. A mere intention to remove, unless such intention is
carried into effect, is not sufÞcient. When he changes it, he acquires a domicil in the place of
his new residence, and loses his original domicil. But upon a return with an intention to
reside, his original domicil is restored… (Bouv1856)

—=—

Do not let these words confuse. Do not cause the Þctions to be set in some perceived Reality, as if a
word describing a Þction exists as some permanent certainty. Only Nature is certain, only God’s
Creation. All else is temporary regardless of the artful deÞnitions of these legal words and terms.

To be clear, when we see in law that a “14th amendment citizen” is both a citizen of the United
States and a citizen of the state he resides in, this is only referential to the corporation called a state
or local government of that legal, commercial realm (jurisdiction) within that state, a public
corporation and agency of the US. This means that the US citizenship (foreigner) is subject Þrst to
the federal United States law of its domicile (source) and then and only then to the state
government law of its residence. In other words, the US citizen-ship is “protected” from the
commercial law of the state, but is therefore also not a party or privy to the protections afforded to
the “republic” that is that private State (People) that reserve all or most rights. To be clear, the
private concerns of the privileged bloodline of People of any State will always trump those of a
foreign, US citizenship residing therein. The public person has no hold on the land, and so has no
rights attached to the land. The national citizen-ship is only ever moveable chattel (property),
though we do not say this outright for fear of domestic revolt. But the law is clear, not by its parts
but by its whole intent. Remember that a person is a thing (Latin: res), not a man. But the state
government is only a legal creation of the People that make up the corporate State, and so the state
government serves only a public, commercial function. To be a citizen of any Þctional government
is to be subject to its creator. And so the use of the United States status in public person-hood is,

!1037
under the 14th amendment, subject to the will of the private People of each of the several States
both federally and locally. This is not a good thing. Private creates public, and so public persons are
always subject and in fealty to private ones. A thing public cannot exist unless the private creates it.
Public never rules over private, for the creator always controls, just as man can never actually rule
over Nature, for all of Existence is a Creation of God. Man’s claim of sovereignty over other men
(over God’s Creation of man) is thus only ever false, for man is the creator of nothing Real or
Original (of Source). And what is of Nature (Jehovah) is not able to be patented as property. What
is original (of Source) must be tainted and corrupted or combined in some form of impurity to be
patentable as a creation of man. A slave cannot control its master. Man must be artiÞcially remade
into manÕs image, into the Þctional (evil) line of the seed of AdamÕs fall, and he must be fooled into
believing this is so through the public-mindedness of state religion and through an education only
in dog-Latin and in Romanized things.

ABSENT - Being away from; at a distance from; not in company with… (Black4)

FOREIGN - Belonging to another nation or country; BELONGING OR ATTACHED TO

ANOTHER JURISDICTION; made, done, or RENDERED IN ANOTHER STATE OR
JURISDICTION; SUBJECT to another jurisdiction; OPERATING or SOLVABLE in another
territory; EXTRINSIC; outside; extraordinary. NONRESIDENT. (reprinted from chapter 2)
(Black2)

SOLVABLE - adjective - 1. That may be SOLVED, resolved or explained. 2. That can be PAID.
(Webs1828)

—=—

It is interesting to note both scripturally and legally that anything which is rendered by Caesar
(seizure of a district) is also that which is solvable by Caesar. In other words, a debtor’s debt can be
paid by rendering back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, as the scriptures declare. For we would only be
rendering back what we borrowed in commerce, as that Þctional status (rented vessel) of person-
hood. For only then would the debt be in Þnality performed (paid by performance) and the
purpose of the person (contract) fully executed.

You see, DC is only an i-magi-nation and creation of congress, and so it is subservient to its legal
creator. Therefore any persons (status) created by it (like all US citizen-ships) are also subservient to
congress. But what is congress? It is merely a representation of the sovereign People, an agency of
that principal sovereignty. To be a subject (in citizenship) under congress is to be subject to the
People who created congress, for congress is only the agent of those sovereign States (People) and
their posterity. Obviously these sovereign People of each State are not citizens of their own created
district or under its subjection. A master is never also his own subject (slave), nor an agent his own
principal. They do not distrain themselves, only districting their civilized, bastardized, cheated,
and adopted savages in piracy. A doctor cannot also be his own patient. No, really! This is an
important maxim of law! For the agent is not merely acting on behalf of the principal, all agents
exist only as a subjective and connected part of the principal, just as all corporations using the name
“McDonald’s” are the agents of that principal corporation, acting in and as a franchise of that
principal’s name, allowed to operate in commerce freely (in franchise) independently of the
principal but only under that principals rules and regulations, and ultimately only to beneÞt and
proÞt the principal. The franchise is in dependence of its principal. The principal can end this
contractual relationship to any of its franchise agents at any time. Each McDonald’s franchise only
exists because it is part of its principal acting in agency. Just as an arm is part of the body while it
acts in agency of the body. Just as employees are only ofÞces created by their employer, so too are
the citizens of the United States only a tiny but “equal” body part and employee of that principal
body politic. We must separate the citizen from the man, never confusing the person (status) of the
man with the man himself. The status (legal persona) of privacy under (belonging to) the State is
not the same as spiritual privacy under God’s Law. The man belongs only to God, while the citizen-

!1038
ship (person) belongs to the state or other principal holder. Man is not human, for that which is
human is what belongs to man. It is only a long con, an imaginary legal fusion of these two statuses
that creates life in that legal persona.

And here is where the whole thing gets convoluted. Pay close attention…

As a citizen-ship, the man is the agent acting in and under the person (status) of the principal. The
agent (man) is the master of the ship (person), but the government is the principal (master) of the
agent (man). And the ship (persona) is property only of the principle (principality), never the agent.
In this way, the shipmaster is only acting in the agency of his principal, and so is subservient to it
like an employee to an employer. The person (status) is subject to its master’s (principal
government’s) law, even as that person (subject) is used by its ship-master (man) via agency under
the doctrine of master and servant (volunteerism), but the person (ship) can only be operated by
the master (man) according to the will and set laws of the principal government (mind controller).
The ship-master (man as operator of the citizen-ship in agency), strangely enough, is thus only ever
the voluntary slave of his principal, for his ship belongs to another master. Like a hired captain
placed upon a ship to rule the crew, the man is only a hireling in the employment (use) of his
master’s ship, and so the captain is the ship-master acting only in the agency of his principal
(government), which is the actual owner of the ship (person). He is a middle manager. A citizen-
ship is, at best, only a house-slave; the slave that is perhaps master over some other slaves, but only
carries the status of slave himself. Shit, they say, ßows downhill. And so every slave can be the
hierarchical, legal master of another. But all slaves are only ofÞces held in agency of a principal
despite their status of “master.” This is the subtle difference between the doctrines of principal and
agent and that of master and servant. While a principal is always a master, a master is not necessarily
a principal. To be master of a servant that is a person (property) of another is only to act in the
agency of the principal owner of that property. Thus the principal owns the legal title of master, for
the master is only an ofÞce created by the principal to control its subject (person). Thus the master
may call the man as a “man,” which generally in legal terms means slave. We are voluntarily acting
as the entitled masters of another’s servant (person). So we may only act according to our own
master’s law under its principal authority. And this is why citizenships (public persons) are labeled
as subjects (servants) of government (the principal and head master), which is in actuality only the
agent of the sovereign People of the States. And so even as US citizenships (persons) are themselves
merely slaves of a master (as men acting in franchise), and the ship-master (man) is merely agent of
a principal (government), our principal (government) is also only the principal agent (house-slave)
of that sovereign People (the several States in compact). They are the creators, the constitutors of
debt, the incorporated god of that sovereign legal government (principal) we pledge oath and
fealty to. Pledging oath to the agent of the principal is the same as pledging oath to the principal.
Government is only the subject of its own master (congress); which is the agent of its own principal
(the People/States); standing only as a legal creation of its own gods (We, the People in blood
consideration).

This is the fall of man into Þction, the Genesis and Revelation of the big lie. This is what the Bible is
trying to tell you to exit (exodus) despite its English Romanization and fantastical history.

—=—

“One cannot be agent and patient, in the same matter.”

—Idem agens et patiens esse non potest. 10  Jenk. Cent. 40. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“The principal part of everything is the BEGINNING.”

—Cujusque rei potissima pars principium est. Dig. 1, 2, 1; 10 Co. 49. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

!1039
 —=—

“That which is the principal part of a thing IS THE THING ITSELF.”

—Unumquodque est id quod est principalius in ipso. Hob. 123. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“If the principal be taken away, the adjunct (agent) is also taken away.”
—Sublato principali tollitur adjunctum. Co. Litt. 389. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“Where there is no principal there is no accessory.”

—Ubi non est principalis non potest esse accessorius. 4 co. 43. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“An accessary (agent) FOLLOWS THE NATURE of his principal.”

—Accessorius sequit naturam sui principalis. 3 Co. 2 Inst. 349. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

“The accessory (agent) DOES NOT LEAD, BUT FOLLOW its principal.”
—Accessorium non ducit sed sequitur suum principale. Co. Ltt 152. (BouvMaxim)

—=—

We cannot be called as subjects under law and also be foolish enough to believe that we are
sovereigns. We cannot any longer be called public and also be dumb enough to believe that any-
thing we do is in private. And we certainly cannot be registered agents for service of process and be
brain-dead enough to believe we are at the same time a principal (above the law). Unless, that is,
we are the patients of the doctors and professors of such a syndicalist infection as public education.

I must admit that when I read most of these maxims, deÞnitions, and court opinions for the Þrst
time I was in a state of shock and denial before it became self-evident, as that procession of the
acceptance of Truth often bears itself so painfully in the dumbed-down, humanized mind. And so I
would Naturally expect that most readers are likely experiencing the same sort of cognitive
dissonance as I did, that illogical disbelief that such a horriÞc system of legal trickery could be
sitting right under our noses and spelled out so openly in these legal texts. But eventually I got
over my egotistic self, that is, my artiÞcial public impersonation of self. I overcame my public
education.

And so perhaps this next deÞnition, as the opinion of the court (the saying of the law), will explain
better than I can the fact that all legal marriages between public persons are fraudulent,
illegitimate, and merely acts of legalized adultery against God designed only with the intent to
cause the replication and issue of a perpetual, bloodless supply of abandoned bastards, which in
turn can legally under the law of the sea be found by the district in distress and distraint and thus
made into wards of the state through piracy. Imagine a judge telling you this opinion straight to
your face, that the law opinionated your marriage contract as the following, which caused your
child to Þctionally be considered as a bastard in the eyes of the state and that the ÒchildÓ was never
your ÒlegalÓ property in any way, again, only according to manÕs law:

!1040
 COHABITING IN STATE OF ADULTERY OR FORNICATION - Living together AS
HUSBAND AND WIFE. Proof must establish at least one act of sexual INTERCOURSE, or
facts from which such act may reasonably be inferred. (Martin v. State, 89 Ind. App. 107, 165
N.E. 763. Warner v. State, 202 Ind. 479, 175 N.E. 661, 663, 74 A.L.R. 1357.) (Black4)

—=—

Read that again, wont you?

What we consider as legal marriage is considered by the state as adultery. Make no mistake about
it. To reign over us we must be made to believe what is not True. It’s real simple… If legal marriage
was a legitimate spiritual joining under God then we wouldn’t need a legal state license to do it.
Only an illicit union needs approval and license by the church and state. Legal marriage is
legalized (licensed) adultery, and only illegitimate things may be issued (birthed) from illegitimate
unions. ItÕs all Þction, for a marriage contracted between two legal persons is not in any way a
wedding of two men of God (male and female). But the falsity of the marriage causes the actions
and product (children) of the parties in contract to be just as illegitimate as that legal marriage is.
This is the fall of man into Þction. Remember, what is Reality and what is the trickery of these
cheaters at law are always opposed to each other. Stop believing legalism has anything to do with
Reality, Nature, or God. It is a design against Reality and Nature as a system of chattel slavery. And
it’s all done through the magic spellings of artful terms, through the inducement of volunteerism
under the doctrine of master and servant, and by the criminal sentencing of us all by our crime of
birth. The devil must always have a contract to interfere in our Lives. All contracts are satanic,
being adversarial to Truth, Trust, Charity, Love, responsibility, and friendship.

VOLENS - Latin. WILLING. He is said to be willing WHO EITHER EXPRESSLY

CONSENTS OR TACITLY MAKES NO OPPOSITION. (Black4)

—=—

Remember that the word “child” and “adult” is just a legal term that means only some detached
legal person (status) of any actual man, and only exists in the jurisdiction of the creator of that
person (child). A legal child is not Real. It’s just a noun (name/title). The actual Life of the child is
not the person of the child. The legal id-entity is not the man. And so what belongs to the state is
your child’s persona, status, and property assigned to it by the state as a recreated set of vital
statistics registered as a son of the nation. You didn’t really abandon your child to the state, you
only gave information that was used to create a legal entity called a legal “child,” which is used
against you in every way imaginable through word-magic and trickery. And you are not in Reality
cohabiting in a state of adultery, only your Þctional persona of the state is, for it doesnÕt exist in
Nature and is certainly not a Creation of Jehovah. That Þction can never be legitimate in the eyes of
God, and the state acting as its own god will never make you or your child equal in sovereignty to
itself or its private holders. You see, its all Þction, especially the very ÒstateÓ in question. And its
power over you is only as powerful as your belief (love) in its own re-creation of you and your
childÕs artiÞcial status. For the childÕs status follows the parentÕs. ItÕs just a pirate cove. ItÕs a
professional, well-oiled machine whose only goal is as a kidnapping racket that ensures the
escheated lands (wealth) remain in the hands of the corrupt few, and that the multitude of goyim
never Þnd out who or what we really are.
—=—

“He who consents CANNOT RECEIVE AN INJURY.”

—VOLENTI NON FIT INJURIA. Broom, Max. 268, 269, 271, 395; Shelf. Mar. & Div. 449; Poole v. Lutz (Black4)

—=—

!1041
We are fooled into believing that a legal contract, a trick of the devilmasters of the magi, is an act of
love. What we believe to be a bond and promise (vow) to God in Lawful marriage is actually only a
Þctional contract of word magic between Þctional persons (legal statuses) that creates a new legal
incorporation of surnames. And the product, the purely commercial issue from this illegitimate
union is the written form of a new Þctional entity as in-formed and thus found as a legal persona
thus written, certiÞed, and registered into a legal existence upon that commercial birth; lost souls
condemned to a life of Þction without actual heirship or blood inheritance available to the future
products (children) of our own legal (adulterous) unions and labor.

AhÉ the sin-tax of legalese.

INSCRIPTION - noun - [Latin inscriptio. See Inscribe.] 1. Something written or engraved TO

COMMUNICATE KNOWLEDGE TO AFTER AGES; ANY CHARACTER, WORD, LINE
OR SENTENCE WRITTEN OR ENGRAVED ON A SOLID SUBSTANCE FOR DURATION;
as inscriptions on monuments, called epitaphs, on pillars, etc. We do not call by this name
writings on paper or parchment. 2. A TITLE. 3. An address or consignment of a book to a
person, as A MARK OF RESPECT, or AN INVITATION OF PATRONAGE. It is less formal
than a dedication. (Webs1828)

INSCRIPTION - In Evidence. Anything written or engraved upon a metallic or other solid

substance, intended for great durability; as upon a tombstone, pillar, tablet, medal, ring, etc. In
Civil law. An engagement which a person who makes a solemn accusation of a crime
against another enters into that he will suffer the same punishment, if he has accused the
other falsely, which would have been inßicted upon him had he been guilty. In Modern Civil
law. THE ENTRY OF A MORTGAGE, LIEN, OR OTHER DOCUMENT AT LARGE IN A
BOOK OF PUBLIC RECORDS; corresponding to "RECORDING" or
“REGISTRATION." (Black4)

INSCRIPTIONES - The name given by the old English law TO ANY WRITTEN
INSTRUMENT BY WHICH ANYTHING WAS GRANTED. (Black4)

INSCRIBE - verb transitive - [Latin inscribo; in and scribo, to write, Eng. to scrape. See Scribe.] 1.
To write on; to engrave on for perpetuity or duration; as, to inscribe a line or verse on a
monument, on a column or pillar. 2. TO IMPRINT ON; AS, TO INSCRIBE ANY THING ON
THE MIND OR MEMORY. 3. To assign or address to; to comment to by a short address, less
formal than a dedication; as, to inscribe an ode or a book to a prince. 4. TO MARK WITH
LETTERS, CHARACTERS OR WORDS; AS, TO INSCRIBE A STONE WITH A NAME. 5.
To draw a Þgure within another, so that all the angles of the Þgure inscribed touch the angles,
sides or planes of the other Þgure. (Webs1828)

SCRIBE - noun - [Latin scriba, from scribo, TO WRITE; formed probably on the root of GRAVE,
scrape, scrub. The Þrst writing was probably engraving on wood or stone.] 1. In a general
sense, a writer. Hence, 2. A notary; A PUBLIC WRITER. 3. In ecclesiastical meetings and
associations in America, a secretary or clerk; ONE WHO RECORDS the transactions of an
ecclesiastical body. 4. In Scripture and the Jewish history, A CLERK OR SECRETARY TO
THE KING. Seraiah was scribe to king David. 2 Samuel 8:17. 5. An ofÞcer who enrolled or
kept the rolls of the army, and called over the names and reviewed them. 2 Chronicles 24:11.
2 Kings 25:19. 6. A WRITER AND A DOCTOR OF THE LAW; a man of learning; one skilled
in the law; one who read and explained the law to the people. Ezra 8:1. - verb transitive - TO
MARK by a model or rule; TO MARK so as to Þt one piece to another; a term used by
carpenters and joiners. (Webs1828)

—=—

If there is one thing the author of this writing is not, it is that of a scribe. I am the anti-scribe, the
anti-pharisee, the anti-attorney, the anti-agent, the anti-dummy. I seek civil death to all strawmen,

!1042
an end to all authority of Þction and agency. I seek the release of men from these scribeÕs legal
writings of law by releasing manÕs mind from believing (loving the idea that) he must act in its
Þctional persona; its slave. This work is only dedicated to that end.

—=—

“The pen is mightier than the sword.”

—Edward Bulwer-Lytton, from the English play ‘Cardinal Richelieu’ (1839)

—=—

As we enter this new age of mass delusion, that of a global United Nations, which some may call
the end times (end of an age), and as the global Þctionalization of all men into a registered,
voluntary global citizenship (slavery) is almost complete in its inscription of that artful world of the
legalization of all things, the pen is truly destroying any and all Natural consideration of all
persons, places, and things. Today, however, the pen is but a digital curser leaving the most
destructive of artiÞcial code, cursing man through its Þctional databases and systems in total
domination of all Natural considerations. In this information age, they are creating instantaneously
(anon) the art form of all men (as vital information without substance) without conscious
awareness that man and person (status) are being fused at the core, the mark and sign of property
(status) becoming indistinguishable from the very design of DNA in every unique man. All of
Nature is being catalogued and turned into proprietary, patented technology (art).

The world is being utterly Romanized through technology (art).

—=—

“United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) is a

permanent body of United Nations Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC). UNGEGN is one of the seven expert bodies of ECOSOC.

“Some of the main goals of UNGEGN are to encourage national and

international geographical NAMES STANDARDIZATION, to promote the
international dissemination of NATIONALLY STANDARDIZED
GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES INFORMATION and TO ADOPT SINGLE
ROMANIZATION SYSTEMS. UNGEGN's GOAL FOR EVERY COUNTRY
is to decide on its own nationally standardized names through the creation
of NATIONAL NAMES AUTHORITIES or recognized
ADMINISTRATIVE processes.”
—Excerpt from: ‘Session of the East Central and South-East Europe Division of the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names,’ United Nations.

—=—

“Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth,
which SHALL BE DIVERSE FROM ALL KINGDOMS, AND SHALL
DEVOUR THE WHOLE EARTH, and shall tread it down, and break it in
pieces.”
—Daniel 7:23, KJB

—=—

!1043
 —=—

“The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) is

moving forward with its plans to use biometric technology TO
IDENTIFY AND TRACK REFUGEES… The UNHCR will use
Accenture’s Biometric Identity Management System (BIMS) for the
endeavor. BIMS can be used to collect facial, iris, and Þngerprint
biometric data, and will also be used to provide many refugees with
THEIR ONLY FORM OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTATION. The system
will work in conjunction with Accenture’s UNIQUE IDENTITY
SERVICE PLATFORM (UISP) TO SEND THIS INFORMATION BACK
TO A CENTRAL DATABASE IN GENEVA, allowing UNHCR ofÞces
ALL OVER THE WORLD to effectively coordinate with the central
UNHCR authority in tracking refugees.”
—Excerpt from an article entitled ‘UN Agency Selects Accenture for Refugee Biometrics Project,’ May 19, 2015 at the ‘Find Biometrics Global Identity
Management’ website

—=—

All men must be given a unique id-entity marker, for the purpose of removing any and all
ambiguities, and this satanic system is best accomplished through biological tracking and
technology. We must understand that the ability to be identiÞed in a unique capacity is the very
foundation of legal tyranny, the word DNA of that strawman system. Without individually veriÞed
proof of artiÞcial existence, without the name, number, and other identifying marks and signs, the
negative Being cannot be turned to and put under the positive law. Man’s law may only apply to
that which it can prove attachment to, which is only the legalized person of man, not man himself.
The surety bond must be established and linked to every unique individual. The ubiquitous Nature
of all Living things in their negative substance of Being (in self-evidence and verbosity) under God
must receive the mark of the name (noun), which establishes his bond and surety to the legal Þction
persona. And so the man in surety who was formally ubiquitous now Þnds himself trapped within
legal borders and jurisdictions that, without his legal status, do not exist to him. For they are
against his Nature, Existing nowhere in Nature. Man must be plucked out of the entirety and
unlimited Realm of GodÕs Nature of Existence and pretended to be stuck in some Þctional legal
jurisdiction of some super-nation that binds not only his strawman but its source, as that of all
other nations.

UBIQUITY - noun - [Latin ubique, every where.] EXISTENCE IN ALL PLACES OR EVERY
WHERE AT THE SAME TIME; omnipresence. THE UBIQUITY OF GOD IS NOT
DISPUTED BY THOSE WHO ADMIT HIS EXISTENCE. (Webs1828)

UBIQUITY - Omnipresence; PRESENCE IN SEVERAL PLACES, OR IN ALL PLACES, AT

ONE TIME. A FICTION of English law is THE "LEGAL UBIQUITY" OF THE SOVEREIGN,
BY WHICH HE IS CONSTRUCTIVELY PRESENT IN ALL THE COURTS. (Black4)

—=—

And here we see the Þne line between God and godship, between christ and its vicars, between
Reality and Þction. Be it the God of Nature or the gods of legal words (persons, places and things),
the existence is proven not by declaration but by the usage of property. The whole is omnipresent in
all parts. This is the Nature of God and of the men pretending godhood.

!1044
What the common, public people of the United States and of all other nations have never realized is
that every single one of us bastards is a refugee. This self-evident Truth is easy to comprehend with
what we have learned thus far, but let us be ever more clear. Like any other refugee in the world,
we have nowhere to retreat to, no land and no castle of our own except that of our protectors in
security via government license as permission to legally intrude in a “public” capacity (though a
legal citizen-ship) on the lands of another (a stranger). We are in constant trespass upon another’s
land holdings. We are at best tenants under contract, protected in our usufruct only by that same
law created by the agencies of those who hold those lands in their own principality. It is their
government and we use their government’s strawmen (status) to gain privileges of use only. A
refugee cannot exist unless he is a burden upon some other place for which the refugee seeks
protective refuge, and the United States is foreign to all the States (People and their private lands).
A True man of God in negative Existence is no refugee, for a man of God would seek no shelter or
dependence upon any government or take upon his God-given name any legal Þction surname,
and he would certainly never believe (love) that such an artiÞcial person of some government
could protect and harm anything but itself from its own devilish designs. A new “refugee” is one in
want of a new god (idol of some nation), of a new landlord to tax and register him into sin (syn).
But only the man that accepts the mark, name, and number brand of a nation is a legalized refugee,
a dependent, a permanent seeker of shelter and safety.

Refugee, and its root refuge, are not words to be found in any of our legal dictionaries. Logically this
makes sense, for a refuge is a seeker of some artiÞcial womb and refuge to shelter himself within
from past dangers. A refugee is not a person, not a place, and not a thing. It is a lack of legal status, a
state of being temporarily outside of all legal jurisdiction. A refugee is not deÞned as homeless, for
he has no legal place to be homeless in. And so the legal codes and courts are quite ambiguous and
general with this purely non-legal word, being in fact a state of non-legal status.

Sadly, we Þnd the beast system has been set up not only to create through perpetual war but to
then collect all of these lost sheep. And the United Nations is the ultimate false representation of all
worldly principalities, the “fourth kingdom” that seeks to mark the entire population of the world
by 2030 as world citizenships; members of a global debtor’s hell. For of course no refugee would
ever be prodigal, never recognizable as part of any posterity (bloodline), would never be able to
claim land of his own to hold, and so will always be a debtor (in performance debt) while trespass-
ing only upon the public places (jurisdictions) of another, never knowing or over-standing any-
thing privately in any way. After all, everywhere he may tread is just a part of that false god of all
nations, and his identity within that nation (part) will signify his abandonment of the christ (the
Law) and therefore Jehovah. In short, the world is being turned into a giant Monopoly board game.

—=—

World Bank, Accenture Call for Universal ID

September 29, 2015

“In a new report issued in collaboration with Accenture, the World

Bank is CALLING ON GOVERNMENTS TO WORK TOGETHER TO
IMPLEMENT STANDARDIZED, COST-EFFECTIVE IDENTITY
MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS. A report synopsis notes that about 1.8
billion adults around the world currently lack any kind of ofÞcial
documentation. THAT CAN EXCLUDE THOSE INDIVIDUALS FROM
ACCESS TO ESSENTIAL SERVICES, and can also cause serious
difÞculties when it comes to trans-border identiÞcation… The
(biometric) ID cards are important for helping to ENSURE that refugees

!1045
 can have access to services, and for KEEPING TRACK of refugee
populations. Moreover, the nature of the deployments has required an
economically feasible solution, and has demonstrated that reliable,
biometric ID cards can affordably be used on a large scale. IT OFFERS
HOPE FOR THE UN’s SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOAL OF
GETTING LEGAL ID INTO THE HANDS OF EVERYONE IN THE
WORLD BY THE YEAR 2030 with its IdentiÞcation for Development
(ID4D) initiative.”
—Excerpt from an article entitled ‘World Bank, Accenture Call for Universal ID,’ September 29, 2015, at the ‘Find Biometrics Global Identity Management’
website

—=—

To say that this part of history is Biblical is an understatement. Technology (art) is now, for the Þrst
time, able to be utilized to cause this global biometric slave system of mammon to exist in that legal
realm. In other words, we are incrementally being plugged-in to an international legal matrix, the
joining of Reality with Þction, biology with law. We are currently witnessing this self-fulÞlling
prophecy as we Live and breathe, the onset of a new world order (new age order). Whatever your
opinion of the Bible, its warnings and predictive parables cannot be denied. And whatever your
opinion of The Matrix movie, its fantastic portrayal of a biometric hell of virtual reality is already
upon us, being implemented and connected at an incrementally alarming rate. But change
necessarily happens slowly, so that each new piece of the technology of these devil’s art is accepted
and impressed upon our children, whom in consequence cannot imagine a Real Life without the
artiÞce of their masters.

—=—

“And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, THAT THEY
SHOULD BELIEVE A LIE: That they all might be damned WHO
BELIEVED NOT THE TRUTH, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”
—2 Thessalonians 2: 11-12, KJB

—=—

“And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond,
to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that NO
MAN MIGHT BUY OR SELL, save he that had the MARK, or the
NAME of the beast, or the NUMBER of his NAME.”
—Revelation 13: 16-17, KJB

—=—

This overused, worn-out part of the book of Revelation (knowledge disclosure) is often taken
literally, as if it will be quite obvious that it’s happening, as if some microchip or other thing will be
used and as if some single man will be that described “anti-christ” beast. But remember, all men are
capable of being beasts (animalistic, soulless hu-mans), and the Bible states clearly that there will be
many (the multitude) who will be deceived and will therefore act in the capacity of antichrist. The

!1046
sign of that beast-hood is citizen-ship unto the many nations, united into one body, one lifeless was
of an artiÞcial person (corporation). A beast is merely a goy (slave) who has taken the name and
social security number of that nations name and property, accepting its legal delusion and
acknowledging its nativity, being born under its sign and brand and respecting its corporate Arms
as Reality.

Here we can already see this biometric mark of id-entity being used worldwide to limit just who is
allowed to receive Òessential servicesÓ from government, including food and water:

—=—

Subsidized Food Shops in Delhi to Have Biometric Authentication by

Next May


November 23, 2015

“India’s government is planning to bring biometric authentication TO

ITS FOOD SUBSIDY SYSTEM, and Delhi, the nation’s capital, should
have it in place next spring... India’s government distributes its food
subsidies through what it calls ‘fair price shops,’ via its PUBLIC
Distribution System. In Delhi alone, there are about 2,300 fair price
shops catering to many thousands of PDS CARDHOLDERS WITH
ACCESS TO SUBSIDIZED FOOD UNDER VARIOUS SCHEMES…
India’s Minister of State FOR FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, Dinesh
Gundu Rao, announced plans back in October to implement biometric
authentication in the country’s fair price shops, ensuring that
individuals (public persons) and THEIR SUBSIDY ENTITLEMENTS
could be accurately veriÞed. The plan was to link identiÞcation to
citizens’ Aadhaar ID cards, WHICH ARE LINKED TO A NATIONAL
BIOMETRIC REGISTRY. Now, says Minister Hussain, work on the
system has already begun. When it’s in place, it should not only cut
down fraud but also help to improve efÞciency, WITH SUBSIDIZED
FOOD TRANSACTIONS TRACKED DIGITALLY AND IN REAL
TIME.”
—Excerpt from an article at the ‘Find Biometrics Global Identity Management’ website, with listed sources as: NDTV, Business Standard, November 23, 2015

—=—

“Singapore To Begin Collecting Iris Scans From Citizens Starting In

2017”

“Starting on Jan. 1, 2017, Singapore will take a step toward becoming a

dystopian novel. The country plans to start collecting iris scans as part
of its REGISTRATION PROCESS FOR CITIZENS AND PERMANENT

!1047
 RESIDENTS. According to Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs, the
initiative to collect eye images will improve the ‘effectiveness and
efÞciencyÕ of operations handled by the Immigration and Checkpoints
Authority (ICA). The ICA will start collecting iris scans, in addition to
photographs and Þngerprints, from Singapore residents in the new year.
THESE IDENTIFIERS WILL BE GATHERED WHEN A CITIZEN GOES
TO RE-REGISTER AN IDENTITY CARD—which Singapore has issued
to ALL RESIDENTS since 1965—OR APPLIES FOR OR RENEWS A
PASSPORTÉ The Electronic Frontier Foundation warns on its website,
‘BIOMETRICS’ BIGGEST RISK TO PRIVACY COMES FROM THE
GOVERNMENTÕS ABILITY TO USE IT FOR SURVEILLANCE. As face
recognition technologies become more effective and cameras are
capable of recording greater and greater detail, SURREPTITIOUS
IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING COULD BECOME THE NORM.”
—International Business Times, excerpt from article posted on 12/29/16 referencing latest announcement from Singapore’s government website, the ‘Ministry of
Home Affairs’ (MHA)

—=—

Dependence is only another word for slavery, as in a performance debt (citizenship). This is not
charity or welfare, this is the perpetual hell as the goal (and gaol) of the United Nations; an
international debtor’s hell; a prison planet.

All slaves (citizens and permanent residents) must be registered (identiÞed/taxed) to ensure
performance, and this may only be guaranteed through total surveillance of all transactions. Cash,
being a tool of anonymity and therefore ambiguity, must be phased out. Without anonymity, buy-
ing, selling, and trading will be impossible without this mark of identity. For it is not merely the
man (in persona) being registered and tracked, it must also be all articles of “property” in pos-
session within “commerce” that will be individually registered to each person. All things will have
a name and identity, including all common men, and all things will be connected in an artiÞcial
intelligence matrix. Everything in Existence (of God) will receive some form of bar code.

Seems perfectly logical on its face, and it will be sold as such, as part of the antichrist “peace and
security” of the United Nations Agenda 2030 global plan. It will “save the world;” not the Real
Earth of Jehovah, of Nature, mind you, but the legal, worldly realm of the ßesh and all secular,
artiÞcial things.

It is disturbing enough to comprehend the current dependence by most common people (goy) of all
the nations upon these legal governments (principalities). But we are now beginning to see how
that dependence will be used as the ultimate weapon to create this beast system via the unique
biometric mark of every man.

But there is a more sinister aspect to this notion of the Biblical mark of the beast, for it is appearing in
these modern, technological (artful) times not as some visible mark or microchip, but as the unique
biological sign of each individual beast! Ironically, incrementally, it is each of our very own
individual traits of the ambiguous uniqueness of NatureÕs Design under God that will be used
against us like a set of intangible chains. For the mark used by these devils (evil geniuses) is
biologically our own self-evidence; the use of the Reality of Nature Itself as the artiÞcial sign of
legal identity for all men. Unconscionably, it is that very Sign of GodÕs self-evident Wonder and

!1048
Design, even through such unique traits of un-redacted randomness, that is literally being utilized
as the mark of each unique commercial beast of burden in this global human capital management
system.

In other words, we bear the mark because we are born with the mark. Our identiÞcation, our
intention is thus scannable. Our Þndable (readable) persona (legal status) will determine our ability
to buy, sell, and trade as if a biological barcode magically and permanently emanates from our
Natural Being. For we cannot escape our very own Nature. Our sins and attachments to the legal
artiÞce will be found whether we like it or not. There is no escape, but by the embracing of Source
and the exclusion of all Þction. This is the Law of God. We are in the Revelation and we must
become the Revealers of Truth against these Luciferian purveyors of lies.

—=—

Vein Recognition

“Vein recognition or vascular biometrics refers to identity management

solutions that authenticate BASED ON THE UNIQUE PATTERNS
MADE BY A USER’S VEINS. Said veins can be IN A USER’S PALM, in
their Þnger. Though the technology used in most vascular biometrics
solutions is still too big to be designed into a smartphone, the modality
is carving out a niche in Þnance and physical access control thanks to a
special trait INHERENT in vein patterns. Because vein patterns are
located beneath the skin and must have blood ßowing through them to
be scanned, THEY ARE VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO SPOOF.”
—Excerpt from: ‘Vein Recognition’ at the ‘Find Biometrics Global Identity Management’ website

—=—

“No community should be considered to be outside the span of this new

agenda. WHATEVER YOUR ETHNICITY, WHATEVER YOUR
LIVELIHOOD, WHATEVER YOUR LIFESTYLE OR LOCATION, ALL
OF YOU ARE INSIDE THE AGENDA. We need to INFORM everyone
that these goals are the heart of a plan for the future OF THE WORLDS
PEOPLE, as well as for THE PLANET ITSELF… PEACE AND
SECURITY, human rights and justice, and sustainable development,
brought together within this 2030 AGENDA.”
—David Nabarro, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General of the United Nations, from a speech on April 15th, 2016

—=—

16.9 - ÒBy 2030, PROVIDE LEGAL IDENTITY FOR ALL, INCLUDING

BIRTH REGISTRATION.”
—United Nations Sustainable Development 2030 Target Goal 16.9

—=—

!1049
 —=—

World Bank

“Overview: PROVIDING LEGAL IDENTITY FOR ALL (INCLUDING

BIRTH REGISTRATION) BY 2030 IS A TARGET SHARED BY THE
INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY as part of the Sustainable
Development Goals (target 16.9). The World Bank Group (WBG) has
launched the IdentiÞcation for Development (ID4D) cross-practice
initiative to help our client countries achieve this goal and with the
vision of making everyone count: ENSURE A UNIQUE LEGAL
IDENTITY AND ENABLE DIGITAL ID-BASED SERVICES TO ALL.”
ÑUnited Nations 2030 Agenda, from a World Bank publication entitled, ÒIdentiÞcation for DevelopmentÓ

—=—

“Let us now repeat the catechism…”

“COMMUNITY. IDENTITY. STABILITY.”

ÑFrom ÔBrave New World,Õ by: Aldous Huxley.

—=—

Community = Nations united into one body politic, one super-nation.



Identity = Birth registration and subsequent legal identity (the mark) for all people of all nations.


Stability = Sustainable Development Plan, Agenda 2030.

This, my friends, is the Brave New World of the fourth beast of revelation being constructed right
in front of our eyes. But do not be fooled, for this is merely the workings of the “Open Conspiracy”
of men, of not-so-secret societies like the Fabians (democratic socialism) and so many others of the
“points of light” of Lucifer. As a Fabian Society member, H.G. Wells was not so much a simple
writer of science Þction as he was a sort of innocent utopian purveyor of ÒblueprintsÓ for the
predictive programming of future generations into the managerially socialist “New World Order,”
the very global society and singular religious Order we see emerging today. Noting here that the
Arms (symbol) of the Fabian Society is a wolf in sheep's clothing… as a distinguished member, Wells
wrote:

—=—

“The political world of the Open Conspiracy must weaken, efface,

INCORPORATE AND SUPERSEDE EXISTING GOVERNMENTS…
The character of the Open Conspiracy will then be plainly displayed. It
will be A WORLD RELIGION. This large, loose assimilatory mass of
groups and societies will deÞnitely and obviously ATTEMPT TO
SWALLOW UP THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE WORLD AND

!1050
 BECOME A NEW HUMAN COMMUNITY… The immediate task
before all people, A PLANNED WORLD STATE, is appearing at a
thousand points of light… [HOWEVER] GENERATIONS OF
PROPAGANDA AND EDUCATION MAY HAVE TO PRECEDE IT.”
—H.G. Wells, understudy of T. H. Huxley, author, lecturer, futurist, and Fabian Society member, from his book ‘The New World Order’ (1940), and preceding from
'The Open Conspiracy' (1928), subtitled 'Blue Prints for a World Revolution'

—=—

How ironic it is that the Life-signs of our own ambiguous Self, as one’s bio-metrical, readable
uniqueness, as the very sign of one’s own individuality as part of God’s unfathomable Oneness in a
seemingly random Design of Natural and genetically passed traits are the very thing that will cause
us to be legally found and re-cog-nized by our Þctional id-entity. We will carry the burden of our
strawman, our debtor status in persona, no longer as an external id-entity but as part of the unique
Design of our genetic make-up. And this is why the Bible insists that we must make a choice to
bear this mark of beast-hood in mammon or follow the Natural path and Law through christ. For
the choice will no longer be available once the legal identity becomes inserted and intertwined with
our very vital signs and DNA, when government property (the legal person/strawman) becomes
an internal part of our temple (body), our deÞled temple is then cut off from Jehovah without the
chance of parole and salvation.

COG - verb transitive - 1. TO FLATTER; to wheedle; to seduce or draw from, BY

ADULATION OR ARTIFICE. 2. To obtrude or thrust in, BY FALSEHOOD OR
DECEPTION; AS, TO COG IN A WORD TO SERVE A PURPOSE. To cog a die, to secure it
so as to direct its fall; TO FALSIFY; TO CHEAT in playing dice. - verb intransitive - 1. TO
DECEIVE; TO CHEAT; TO LIE. 2. To wheedle. - noun - The tooth of a wheel, by which IT
DRIVES ANOTHER WHEEL OR BODY. - verb transitive - To Þx a cog; to furnish with cogs.
(Webs1828)

COGGING - participle present tense - Wheedling; deceiving; CHEATING; INSERTING

DECEITFULLY; FIXING COGS. - noun - CHEAT; DECEPTION; FALLACY. (Webs1828)

COGITATE - verb intransitive - To think; to meditate. (Webs1828)

COGITATION - noun - 1. The act of thinking; thought; meditation; contemplation. 2.

THOUGHT DIRECTED TO AN OBJECT; PURPOSE. (Webs1828)

COGNITIO - In old English law. The ACKNOWLEDGMENT of a FINE; THE CERTIFICATE

OF SUCH ACKNOWLEDGMENT. In the Roman law. The judicial examination or hearing
of a CAUSE. (Black4)

COGNOVIT - Defendant has CONFESSED judgment and justice of claim. WRITTEN

AUTHORITY OF DEBTOR AND HIS DIRECTION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT
AGAINST HIM. (Black4)

COGNOMINAL - adjective - 1. Pertaining to a SURNAME. 2. HAVING THE SAME NAME.

(Webs1828)

COGNOMINATION - noun - A SURNAME; the name of a FAMILY; A NAME GIVEN

FROM ANY ACCIDENT OR QUALITY; as Alexander the Great. (Webs1828)


COGNOMEN - In English law. A SURNAME. A NAME ADDED to the nomen proper, or
name of the individual; a name DESCRIPTIVE OF THE FAMILY. In Roman law. A man's
FAMILY NAME. The Þrst name (praenomen) was the PROPER NAME of the individual: the

!1051
 second (nomen) indicated the GENS or TRIBE to which HE BELONGED; while the third
(cognomen) DENOTED HIS FAMILY OR HOUSE. The agnomen was added ON ACCOUNT
of some particular EVENT, as a FURTHER DISTINCTION. (Black4)


—=—

“The COGNOMEN is derived from the BLOOD of ancestors, and is

INTRINSIC; an AGNOMEN arises from an EVENT, and is EXTRINSIC.”
—COGNOMEN MAJORUM EST EX SANGUINE TRACTUM, HOC INTRINSECUM EST; AGNOMEN EXTRINSECUM AB EVENTU. 6 Coke, 65.
(Black4)

—=—

COGNATION - In the civil law. SigniÞes generally the kindred which exists between two
persons who are united by ties of BLOOD OR FAMILY, or both. CIVIL COGNATION is
that which proceeds ALONE from the ties of FAMILIES, as the KINDRED BETWEEN THE
ADOPTED FATHER AND THE ADOPTED CHILD. Mixed cognation is that which unites at
the same time the ties of blood and family, as that which exists between brothers the ISSUE
of the same LAWFUL marriage. NATURAL COGNATION IS THAT WHICH IS ALONE
FORMED BY TIES OF BLOOD: such is the kindred of THOSE WHO OWE THEIR ORIGIN
TO AN ILLICIT CONNECTION, either in relation to their ascendants or collaterals. (Black4)

COGNATUS - Latin. In the civil law. A relation by the MOTHER'S side; a cognate. A
relation, or kinsman, generally. (Black4)

COGNITIONES - Ensigns and ARMS, or a military COAT PAINTED WITH ARMS. (Black4)

COGNATES - (Latin cognati.) Relations by the mother's side, or by females. Roman Law. A
common term in Scotch law. (Black4)

COGNATI - Latin. In the civil law. Cognates; relations by the mother's side. Relations in the
LINE of the mother. Relations by or through females. (Black4)

COGNATIO - Latin. In the civil law. Cognation. RELATIONSHIP, or KINDRED

GENERALLY. Relationship through FEMALES, as distinguished from agnatio, or
relationship through males. Agnatio a patre sit, cognatio a matre. See Agnatio. In Canon law.
Consanguinity, as distinguished from afÞnity. Consanguinity, as including afÞnity. (Black4)

RECOGNIZE - verb transitive - rec'onize. [Latin recognosco; re and cognosco, TO KNOW. The g
in these words has properly no sound in English.] 1. To recollect or recover the knowledge of,
either with an avowal of that knowledge or not. WE RECOGNIZE A PERSON at a distance,
when we recollect that we have seen him before, or that we have formerly known him. We
recognize his features or his voice. SPEAK, VASSAL; RECOGNIZE THY SOVEREIGN
QUEEN. 2. TO RE-VIEW; TO RE-EXAMINE. - verb intransitive - TO ENTER AN
OBLIGATION OF RECORD before a proper tribunal. A B recognized in the sum of twenty
pounds. (Webs1828)

COGENIAL - For (same as) congenial. (Webs1828)

CONGENIAL - adjective - [Latin. See GENERATE.] 1. Partaking of THE SAME GENUS,

KIND OR NATURE; KINDRED; cognate; as congenial souls. 2. BELONGING TO THE
NATURE; NATURAL; AGREEABLE TO THE NATURE; usually followed by to; as, this
severity is not congenial to him. 3. Natural; agreeable to the nature; ADAPTED; as a soil
congenial to a plant. (Webs1828)

!1052
 **Author’s note: To be congenial to God’s Nature is the opposite of being congenial to the nature of
governmentÕs legal Þction law and public personhood. Remember, a ÒnaturalÓ is an insult bestowed
by nobles upon human capital, as a word of attainder in corruption or ignoble admixture of blood.

COGENT - adjective - [See Cogency.] 1. Forcible, in a physical sense; as the cogent force of
nature. 2. Urgent; PRESSING ON THE MIND; forcible; powerful; NOT EASILY RESISTED;
as a cogent reason, or argument. THE HARMONY OF THE UNIVERSE FURNISHES
COGENT PROOFS OF A DEITY. (Webs1828)

COGENCY - noun - Force; strength; POWER OF COMPELLING; literally, urgency, or

driving. It is used chießy of moral subjects, and in relation to FORCE OR PRESSURE ON
THE MIND; as the cogency of motives or arguments. (Webs1828)

COGNOSCITIVE - adjective - Having the power of knowing. (Webs1828)

COGNOSCIBLE - adjective - That may be known. (Webs1828)

COGNIZOR - noun - One who acknowledges the right of the plaintiff or cognizee, in a Þne;
otherwise called the defendant or deforciant. (Webs1828)

COGNIZEE - noun - In law, one to whom a Þne is acknowledged, or the plaintiff in an action
FOR THE ASSURANCE OF LAND BY FINE. (Webs1828)

COGNOSCENCE - noun - [See Cognition.] Knowledge; the act or STATE of knowing.

(Webs1828)

COGNITION - noun - Knowledge or CERTAIN KNOWLEDGE, as FROM PERSONAL

VIEW OR EXPERIENCE. (Webs1828)

COGNIZANCE - noun - 1. JUDICIAL NOTICE OR KNOWLEDGE; the hearing, trying and

determining of a cause or action in court. The court of kings bench takes cognizance of civil
and criminal causes. IN THE UNITED STATES, THE DISTRICT COURTS HAVE
COGNIZANCE OF MARITIME CAUSES. 2. JURISDICTION, or right to try and determine
causes. The court of kings bench has original jurisdiction and cognizance of all actions of
trespass vi et armis. 3. In law, AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OR CONFESSION; as in FINES,
the acknowledgment of the cognizor or deforciant, that the RIGHT TO THE LAND in
question is in the plaintiff or cognizee, by gift or otherwise; in replevin, the
acknowledgment of the defendant, that he took the goods, but alledging that he did it legally
as the bailiff OF ANOTHER PERSON WHO HAD A RIGHT TO DISTRAIN. 4. A BADGE
ON THE SLEEVE OF A WATERMAN OR SERVANT, BY WHICH HE IS KNOWN TO
BELONG TO THIS OR THAT NOBLEMAN OR GENTLEMAN. 5. Knowledge or notice;
PERCEPTION; observation; as the cognizance of the senses. 6. Knowledge by recollection.
(Webs1828)

RECOLLECT - verb transitive - [re and collect; Latin recolligo, recollectus.] 1. To collect again;
applied to ideas that have escaped from the memory; to recover or call back ideas to the
memory. I recollect what was said at a former interview; or I cannot recollect what was said. 2.
To recover or recall THE KNOWLEDGE OF; to bring back to the mind or memory. I met a
man whom I thought I had seen before, but I could not recollect his name or the place where I
had seen him. I do not recollect you, sir. 3. TO RECOVER RESOLUTION OR COMPOSURE
OF MIND. The Tyrian queen admir'd his fortunes, more admir'd the man, then recollected
stood. [In this sense, collected is more generally used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

It seems the only time we personally recollect our composure in strawman form is when we disturb
the “peace” of that commercial system it exists within. It is at these times when, with utter fear and

!1053
cognizance, we realize that we are nothing more than cogs in this legal system. And so we answer
through our cog-nomen (cog name). But that cognomen was used not as the family name, for that
bloodline is legally tainted by the birth event. Thus the cognomen (surname) is turned from a vital
statistic representing True family connection and inheritable blood, into an agnomen that re-
presents that Reality of Nature and blood into a birth event that created a legal entity, a strawman
given the attributes and legal appearance of each of us. As the agnomen (legal surname as property
of the state) arises (is recreated into a legal form without substance) from an extrinsic event, we
may now understand how our negative blood right is turned into a positive legal right, and how
our last name in its statistical consideration of status deÞnes our place or jurisdiction. It is when we
use (employ) this external name not our own instead of our internal name based on blood and
family that we declare our law. While the cognomen is Natural, the agnomen is purely a legal
(artiÞcial) word, and is governed according to man's law of artiÞce. And so to be clear, any and all
usages of the name “Clint Richardson” in this anonymous work are not used in any way to give
artiÞcial, legal, or other form of pretended life or existence to any legally registered cognomen-
turned agnomen in any nation, state, country, military jurisdiction, or in any other Þctional or legal
capacity imaginable or already patented. The rest of the time, unchallenged by the immediate
sanction and authority of these tyrant’s false law of the commercial sea and false name, we pretend
to be Free while in actuality we are merely slaves impressed with our own oblivious recognizance,
as prisoners on parol. This is called as legal freedom within the closed-matrix and jurisdictional
borders that enclose legal persons. If we follow the rules of the antichrist, anti-God system, we are
left alone in our public franchise (freedom) of citizen-ship like birds with clipped wings.

RECOGNIZANCE - noun - recon’izance. 1. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF A PERSON OR

THING; avowal; PROFESSION; AS THE RECOGNIZANCE OF CHRISTIANS, BY WHICH
THEY AVOW THEIR BELIEF IN THEIR RELIGION. 2. In law, AN OBLIGATION OF
RECORD WHICH A MAN ENTERS INTO BEFORE SOME COURT OF RECORD OR
MAGISTRATE DULY AUTHORIZED, WITH CONDITION TO DO SOME PARTICULAR
ACT, AS TO APPEAR at the assizes, TO KEEP THE PEACE OR PAY A DEBT. This
recognizance differs from a bond, as it does not create a new debt, BUT IT IS THE
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF A FORMER DEBT OR RECORD. This is witnessed by the
record only, and not by the party's seal. There is also a recognizance in the nature of a statute
staple, acknowledged before either of the chief justices or their substitutes, the mayor of the
staple at Westminster and the recorder of London, which is to be enrolled and certiÞed into
chancery. 3. The verdict of a jury impaneled upon assize. (Webs1828)

—=—

Remember this word cog, for it is TO CHEAT. This can only be legally done through the attached
and corrupted disease of the surname, by a cognomen (family name) that is based on the agnomen
(birth event). This, it turns out, is the key to all organized crime of government, as we will soon see.
For what is a criminal but one that cheats another? A pirate…

A judge (administrator) of legal persons (strawmen) may not take notice of a man without some
badge and token of cognizance upon his person (a mark and sign/surname of legal status). In other
words, the judge must Þnd the Þctional, proprietary status within the manÕs use of his full name in
order to profess the right to try and determine that man’s fate as surety for the state’s property
(person) in that Þctional districtÕs jurisdiction. The manÕs contracted person must be found to be at
sea (in interstate commerce, in foreign trade), where it can be summoned like a demon to Þction-
ally, legally appear. He must be found to be carrying the mark of the Arms (Flag and Seal) of the
United States or other district so as to be known to that courtÕs legal jurisdiction over virtual water
(maritime/admiralty law). Without confession of that mark, no knowledge may be found to be
acknowledged. This is to say that ambiguity of name kills the ability of such a demon to be
summoned. No cognizance may be obtained in any case without the user of some ship (commercial
persona) present at bar and represented by the man in surety to it, as the master of that citizen-ship
subject to its principal that set it upon a commercial ad-venture in agency.

!1054
Here we must pause to comprehend just what has been deÞned. Knowledge is of two kinds, that of
the Nature of all things and that of the imaginations and admixture of the Þctional re-presentation
of all things upon Nature. We already know the difference between these kinds, for one is the sub-
stance of GodÕs self-evident Nature of Creation and one is merely the re-creations of manÕs designs
against that Reality of Nature. And there is nothing new under the sun-gods, only trickery.

But the most important knowledge we may ever possess is that which allows us to not only
distinguish between these two types, between Reality and Þction, but that which allows us to
choose one over the other at all times. Our choice in one destroys and renders powerless the other.
For this legal system to remain intact, our cognizance and thus acceptance and consent of legalisms
as mere Þctions of law is always created through trickery, and must therefore be forced into our
minds by trickery. We must be made to believe that which is unbelievable. We must be made to
embrace the lie, the cog, so that our minds may be governed (controlled) by the creators (cogitators)
and implementors (conjurers) of the big lie. We must be made to love being cheated by being made
to recognize and know no other path, no other law.

It is important to recognize that these beast systems, as all the legal governments of men, do
deÞnitively exist in Þction, as much as any other master created by the imaginations of Þction
writers. Our belief in those monsters cause us to turn on lights in dark hallways to verify they have
not leapt off their perspective pages and manifested themselves into Reality through our own
imagined fear of them. Inversely, governmentÕs green propaganda causes us to turn those lights off
even if we are in want of their artiÞcial luminance. And so yes, they exist; though self-evidently not
in Nature, granted. But at this point we have sufÞciently explored the concept of legal, Þctional
existence enough to know that it is an existence based purely on respect in the minds of men, not a
Real Existence of the senses. Its characters must be animated by men, lest they fall to waste and
ruination as all of manÕs artiÞce against GodÕs Nature and Law shall. It cannot hurt you, but the
men who are believers in (lovers of) its Þction as Reality certainly can hurt you as any cult follow-
ing of brainwashed servants might.

The only difference is that in a cult, the harm done is illegal. The subject of Þction is granted license
to harm and kill in the name of the Þction, supporting a superstructure that can only ever function
and exist as long as the cult of its constitution exists. The plantations (colonies) can only hold slaves
as long as those men can be made to believe and accept that they are slaves.

The author stresses here that this war is not one of brute strength but of personal will and the will
to Exist despite false personas. It is a war between the compos mentis, rational man and the
temptations of the world (age). It is a battle of intent. For to Live only under GodÕs Will and
Testament is becoming an evermore punishable crime, not only according to the legalistic law of
nations, but also in the minds of the already enslaved beasts who proÞt from and thus profess that
international system of mammon in name and occupation, and whose ßattering titles and estates
could not Þctionally exist without its enslavement of all others. Each individual man is a potential
agent of that government of nations, each protecting his perceived stake (cross) in that Þction. And
each gentile man will be so publicly brainwashed into continuously seeking out each otherÕs mark
and identity in both social and commercial life that the remnant, the remainder of christÕs
unmarked followers will be made to appear as evil and shunned as the unmarked, the unclean, the
unvaccinated. Life in antithesis Ñ where dis-ease is the new ease and spiritual death is the new life.

The big lie will not be avoidable in the near future, in our lifetime, for its mark is al-ready
identiÞable, in place beneath our ßesh and within each unique retinal gaze. The lie will apparently
be fully functional by 2030 if the Vatican-supported United Nations has its way, when all common
men upon this earth will purportedly be turned into ÒrefugeesÓ by being natural-born or by
naturalization.

For to be born of any nation is the sign and mark of already being its beast of burden.

!1055
 —=—

“Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also
obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. It is a
faithful saying: FOR IF WE BE DEAD WITH HIM, WE SHALL ALSO
LIVE WITH HIM: If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: IF WE
DENY HIM, HE ALSO WILL DENY US…”
—2 Timothy 2: 10-12, KJB

—=—

If we deny the Word (Son), the Law (Son) of God will also deny us. We will not be protected by that
which we turn our back to. If we pollute and poison our bodies and all of Nature, then Nature will
poison us, for this simple and self-evident Law is ignored. But Þguratively as well, if we allow our
blood to be corrupted by man’s legal inventions, then we cannot look to the Law of God’s Nature
(the Son) to save us, for we have strayed from the clean and righteous path.

Remembering that we must read this in the Þgurative, allegorical nature for which it was originally
written, we may recognize the familiar theme that civil death is spiritual Life. This True and
unblemished Life can only be Lived in circumcision (separation) from the legal realm and of its
ßattering names and titles, numbers and marks. In other words, a Life Lived Truly without sin
(artiÞce). And what is suffering but a lack of artiÞce? What is suffering when all of GodÕs green
pastures and abundance are readily available to you? What is suffering but the lack of artiÞcial
wealth in mammon at the cost of your very soul? To deny the Son of God is to deny the Word of
God, and to deny the Word is to deny the self-evidence of Law and Nature that is Jehovah, the
untainted embrace of which is the only salvation.

For a moment, let us read these verses as they were intended to be under-stood. For the scriptures
state that they may also obtain the salvation which is in (Jehovah is salvation) with eternal glory. “Jesus
Christ” should not be interpreted any other way than this, as the perfected example (New
Testament) of what it is to follow the Law of God’s Nature through this allegorical story of christ.

TESTAMENT - noun - [Latin testamentum, from testor, to make a WILL.] 1. A solemn authentic
instrument in writing, by which a person declares his will as to the disposal of his estate
and effects after his death. This is otherwise called A WILL. A testament to be valid, must be
made when the testator is OF SOUND MIND, and it must be subscribed, witnessed and
published in such manner as the law prescribes. A man in certain cases may make a valid
will by words only, and such will is called nuncupative. 2. THE NAME OF EACH GENERAL
DIVISION OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES; as the Old
Testament; the New testament. The name is equivalent to covenant, and in our use of it, we
apply it to the books which contain the old and new dispensations; that of Moses, AND
THAT OF JESUS CHRIST. (Webs1828)

NUNCUPATIVE - adjective - [Latin, to declare.] 1. Nominal; EXISTING ONLY IN NAME. 2.

PUBLICLY or SOLEMNLY declaratory. 3. Verbal, not written. A nuncupative will or test-
ament is one which is made by the verbal declaration of the testator, and depends merely on
oral testimony for proof, THOUGH AFTERWARDS REDUCED TO WRITING. (Webs1828)


—=—

We may declare that the New Testament is the nuncupative testament of christ, as written by his
witnesses. But to be stuck in such a fallaciously logical history of events defeats the spiritual self-
evidence of that timeless New Testament. Obviously books written by “disciples” that were not

!1056
even born in christÕs supposed historical timeline of Life cannot be the testimony of actual Þrst-
hand witnesses. This is the type of vulgarity of reason that defeats the message of that ancient,
parabolic, and timeless knowledge scripture. We lose ourselves in the history and forget the
purpose and intent of His story. We “prove” in our minds that these histories did not actually exist,
and choke on our own conceit and pride in such false victories even as we accept other false
histories, “proving” one history false by the acceptance and assent to other false histories and
Þctional characters. To say that this ridiculousness causes us to miss the very point of the story is
the understatement of the age. We are in the midst of “bearing false witness” to all that is
adversarial to christ’s teachings, loving what we should hate and blaming history for our own sins.

A vast multitude of the public beholders and believers (faithful servants) of the masters of the big
lie very likely cannot be told of their dis-position in that international delusion under the legal,
Roman law of nations; that they are plugged into that legal matrix code through trickery and word-
magic, and that their blood is utterly (Þguratively) corrupted in law, because they try to stand with-
out the blood of christ (God’s Law). The path may be shown to all, but only the few may actually
walk in its Light. Soon it will be too late for most to recover what they have already lost, for the loss
happened so long ago, and the newly birthed (registered/taxed) generations of Caesar are already
being skillfully, artiÞcially detached from their families through legal means, becoming wards of
the state at birth and being systematically reprogrammed through entertainment and public
education to loath all family connections and visitations. We are being taught to despise even the
very purpose of the spiritual, religious custom of marriage, which rests purely on the passing of
lands to the heirs of the blood without need of legal means or wills of Þctional persons that stand
only in the legal (artiÞcial) corruption of blood.

It is interesting to note that the preÞx used in many of our modern words, such as dis-position, dis-
ease, dis-illusion, dis-jointed, dis-covery, dis-proportional, dis-gust, and dis-trust, is one of the
names attributed to “satan” in the circles of hell imagined by Dante in the 1200s.

—=—

Lucifer: Circle 9, Inferno 34:

 

“Lucifer, Satan, DIS, Beelzebub--Dante throws every name in the book

at the Devil, once the most beautiful angel (Lucifer means "light-
bearer") then—following his rebellion against God—THE SOURCE OF
EVIL AND SORROW IN THE WORLD, beginning with his corruption
of Eve and Adam in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3).”
—From ‘danteworlds’ website, paraphrase of Dante’s ‘Inferno’

—=—

“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about
like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.”
—1 Peter 5:8, KJB

—=—

"How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How
you are cut down to the ground, You who weakened the nations!”
—Isaiah 14:12-14, KJB

—=—

!1057
 —=—

“Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come
unless the falling away comes Þrst, AND THE MAN OF SIN IS
REVEALED (human, spiritually dead, soulless animal man), the son of
perdition, WHO OPPOSES AND EXALTS HIMSELF ABOVE ALL
THAT IS CALLED GOD OR THAT IS WORSHIPED, SO THAT HE
SITS AS GOD IN THE TEMPLE OF GOD, SHOWING HIMSELF
THAT HE IS GOD.”
—Thessalonians 2: 3-4, KJB

—=—

“You are of YOUR FATHER the devil, AND THE DESIRES OF YOUR
FATHER YOU WANT TO DO. He was a murderer from the beginning,
and DOES NOT STAND IN THE TRUTH, BECAUSE THERE IS NO
TRUTH IN HIM. WHEN HE SPEAKS A LIE, HE SPEAKS FROM HIS
OWN RESOURCES, for he is a liar and THE FATHER OF IT.”
—John 8:44, KJB

—=—

If I didn’t know better, I’d say that last verse was talking to every one of us strawman citizen-ships
out here, telling us that we are Living the lie created by our father, as the creator and government
over all legal lies. After all, to be in the agency of anyone or anything but Jehovah is certainly to be
in league with some devilÕs contract in evil (artiÞce). The shoe certainly Þts. ItÕs all in the adoptive,
legal family. For the agent only exists to beneÞt its principal, that sovereign legal prince of the big
legal lie. Think about itÉ for the son of perdition is any man that exalts himself and his Þction over
that of the Reality of God. It’s just satanism. We have all been manipulated and turned into just a
controlled opposition (patriot) against God and Nature. And just as christ can only be manifested
through any man’s action, satan can only be manifested through every man’s equal inaction.

What is it to be a victim of this sacred curse of the son of perdition? It is not merely to lose stuff or
possessions, but to be possessed as the stuff of satan. It is to lose your soul. It is the ruination
connected to celebrating and worshiping the artiÞce of manÕs Þction and i-magi-nations, of celeb-
rating instead of utterly destroying the United Nations. For to have an entirety of loss can only
refer to that which we ought to hold most precious, our spirit and our soul. Perdition is akin to
spiritual death, the loss of timelessness and of intrinsic pricelessness, the loss of even the ability for
True happiness, as the utter corruption of the soul by the killing of the spirit and pretended
corruption of the blood. Perdition is the artiÞcial womb, the legal matrix of anti-Truth, the anti-
God. The realm of that which is adversarial and exists only in the imagination and in calumniation
(in name, form, and image only), this is the whole of the meaning of that word satan. If Jehovah is
the Existing Oneness of all Things, then satan as Its opposite is the non-Existent nothingness and
non-sense of the big legal lie. If God Created Nature, then satan (including the satanic man) may
create nothing but Þction (anti-Nature). Matter vs. anti-matter.

And yet the solution is so simpleÉ embrace only the Pure Truth of Reality! Accept no more lies! All
we must do is choose the Son (Word of Law) of God over the son (lying words) of perdition.

!1058
 PERDITION - noun - [Latin perditio, from perdo, to lose, to ruin.] 1. ENTIRE LOSS OR RUIN;
utter destruction; as the perdition of the Turkish ßeet. [In this sense, the word is now nearly or
wholly obsolete.] 2. THE UTTER LOSS OF THE SOUL OR OF FINAL HAPPINESS IN A
FUTURE STATE; FUTURE MISERY OR ETERNAL DEATH. The impenitent sinner is
condemned to Þnal perdition. IF WE REJECT THE TRUTH, WE SEAL OUR OWN
PERDITION. 3. Loss. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

—=—

Is this religion? NoÉ Perdition is but an apt description of the 2030, Agenda 21, Sustainable
Development plan under the United Nations, the worldwide registration and taxation as CaesarÕs
rendering of all men into a global, social Þction under the Òsafety and securityÓ and surety of
positive law. It is to cause all men not just to become, but to believe (love) that they are property, as
the false identities of legal persons (strawmen).

In short, this is a battle between manÕs respect of two polar opposites, the Natural Kingdom of God
and the artful principalities of a few men. Sadly, ironically, just as it was in the Roman colosseums,
the majority of corporate, ßatteringly titled ÒChristiansÓ that have been so Judaized and Latinized
into that beast system of goyim through so many denominations under legalistically titled
ÒChristian Nations,Ó will likely be the leaders and protectorate of that international system of
Caesar (seizure), believing that identiÞcation of all men on earth is actually a charitable concern of
God. For as it is today the delusion is more powerful and somehow more appealing than Reality,
the lie easier than the Truth. By 2030, future technology will no doubt provide remedy for all the
loose ends and current perceptions of the intent of these ultimate nation-builders, taking all doubt
away from that evil delusion in its image among good men, though not before they Þrst foolishly
help to build their own international incorporation of perdition. The public illiterates educated
only in variations of dog-Latin, try as they may, will never actually be able to read their Bibles and
so will never Truly know the Word (Son) and Law of God. For more than any other breed of brain-
washed and managed hu-man capital, the falsely and ßatteringly entitled ÒChristiansÓ that do not
follow christ in any way but in name only (in calumniation = in satanism) within this system of
blatant usury in mammon, are a terrible army of righteousness revealing the legal ÒwordÓ not in
GodÕs Nature and Law but in their own monetary wealth and self-delusion, as the he-goats of the
goats. They are perhaps the most dangerous of all of CaesarÕs indentured pagans, as history has
certainly shown, for they more than any other sect must justify, prove, and publicly show their
legal existence in membership to their legal gods, and historyÕs death toll certainly shows just how
powerful such a cult of corporate Christian personality can be, killing, burning, and torturing in the
name of God. 



But letÕs be perfectly clear here. All nations claim God as their purpose and as the reason for their
legal (anti-God) existence. All nations claim that God is behind their armies of paid mercenary
soldiers even as they kill for purely commercial purposes in the name of mammon. And the
ultimate principality of the United Nations and its prostituting, mercenary peace-keeping forces,
with members spanning all nations and intermixed within, will certainly claim that God is as well
on their international side.

Just what is the goal of the United Nations and their international ÒPeacekeepingÓ regime?

DISARMAMENT, DEMOBILIZATION AND REINTEGRATION

Disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) has become an integral part of post-
conßict peace consolidation, featuring prominently in the mandates of peacekeeping
operations over the last twenty years.  

DDR activities are crucial components of both the initial stabilization of warn-torn societies
as well as their long-term development. DDR must be integrated into the entire peace
process from the peace negotiations through peacekeeping and follow-on peacebuilding
activities in Timor-Leste.

!1059
 DISARMAMENT IS THE COLLECTION, DOCUMENTATION, CONTROL AND
DISPOSAL OF SMALL ARMS, ammunition, explosives and light and heavy weapons from
combatants AND OFTEN FROM THE CIVILIAN POPULATION.

Demobilization is the formal and controlled discharge of active combatants from armed
forces and groups, including a phase of “reinsertion” which provides short-term assistance to
ex-combatants.

Reintegration is the process by which ex-combatants acquire civilian status and gain
SUSTAINABLE employment and income. It is a political, social and economic process with
an open time-frame, primarily taking place in communities at the local level.

The objective of the DDR process is to contribute to security and stability in post-conßict
environments so that recovery and development can begin. DDR helps create an enabling
environment for political and peace processes by dealing with security problem that arises
when ex-combatants are trying to adjust to normal life, during the vital transition period
from conßict to peace and development.

DDR supports ex-combatants to become active participants in the peace process through:

• REMOVING WEAPONS FROM THE HANDS OF COMBATANTS;

• taking the combatants out of military structures;
• integrating combatants socially and economically into society.

—United Nations website (un.org), from ‘Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration’ page

—=—

I can think of nothing worse that to be forced to integrate into a society that is caused to exist by
world governance and corporate inßuence. But hey, isnÕt that exactly what happened to the
“confederates” after the civil war?

I musingly ask how God can possibly be on every nationÕs side considering each nationÕs vast
differential of moral and ethical laws, and also be on the side of all nations united into one satanic
brood and incorporation? Is that not oxymoronic? Or perhaps just moronic? Or perhaps its because
the nations arenÕt really representative of the people in their nativity?

But hey, why not, for most corporate ÒunitedÓ religions licensed by these nations already support
the United Nations.

—=—

“The General Assembly of the National Council of the Churches of Christ

in the USA and Church World Service have called for churches in the U.S.
to observe the 60th anniversary of the issuance of the United Nations'
Universal Declaration on HUMAN Rights on Sunday, Dec. 14. In a Nov. 24
letter, the organizations praised the Declaration on HUMAN Rights for its
far-sighted application and continuity with THE CHURCH'S MISSION.
"Its afÞrmation of HUMAN dignity and of harmonious relationships
among people is SURELY consistent with the gospel of God's love for
every PERSON and God's will for reconciliation," the letter said.”
—United Church of Christ website, dated December 06, 2008, written by Gregg Brekke

—=—

!1060
The persons of men, which “God’s gospel of love” says over and over to never respect, are
certainly respected by such massive “religious” corporations, which we must remember only exist
as artiÞcial persons. And need I say more about what exactly are “hu-man rights” at this point?
For no man may receive the mark until he is made to be considered as merely a hu-man animal
through legal personiÞcation, and this can only be accomplished by marking every man on earth
into the international social security scheme run by the United Nations ISSA system and its World
Bank. This is a New World Order so oft spoken of by so many leaders of so many principalities
(nations).

—=—

ÒPut on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against
the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle NOT against ßesh and blood, BUT
AGAINST PRINCIPALITIES, AGAINST POWERS, AGAINST THE
RULERS OF THE DARKNESS OF THIS WORLD, AGAINST
SPIRITUAL WICKEDNESS IN HIGH PLACES… Stand therefore,
having your loins girt about with TRUTH, and having on the
breastplate of righteousness; ABOVE ALL, TAKING THE SHIELD OF
FAITH, WHEREWITH YE SHALL BE ABLE TO QUENCH ALL THE
FIERY DARTS OF THE WICKED. And take the helmet of salvation, and
the sword of the Spirit, WHICH IS THE WORD OF GOD…”
—Ephesians 6: 11-12, 14, 16–17, KJB

—=—

In short, this united church corporation is celebrating the principalities and legalistic systems of
men over that of the Kingdom of God against the very scriptures they employ (use) to pretend to
justify their very legal existence. Of course, most goyim of the world born and heralded within these
nations have no capacity to comprehend these words as written, showing how the strong delusion
of language (babel) is the satanists most powerful tool.

PRINCIPALITY - noun - 1. SOVEREIGNTY; supreme power. 2. A prince; one INVESTED

with sovereignty. Titus 3:1. 3. The TERRITORY of a prince; or the country which gives title
to a prince; as the principality of Wales. 4. Superiority; predominance. [Little used.] 5. In
Scripture, royal state or attire. Jeremiah 13:1. (Webs1828)

REFUGEE - noun - 1. One who ßies to a shelter or place of safety. 2. One who, in times of
persecution or political commotion, FLEES TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY FOR SAFETY; as
the French refugees, who left France after the revocation of the edict of Nantz, and settled in
Flanders and America; the refugees from Hispaniola, in 1792; and the American refugees, who
left their country at the revolution. (Webs1828)

REFUGE - noun - [Latin refugium, refugio; re and fugio, to ßee.] 1. SHELTER OR PROTECTION
FROM DANGER OR DISTRESS. Rocks, dens and caves, but I in none of these Þnd place or
refuge. We have made lies our refuge. Isaiah 28:15. We might have strong consolation, who
have ßed for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before us. Hebrews 6:18. 2. That which shelters
or protects from danger, distress or calamity; a strong hold which protects by its strength, or
a sanctuary which secures safety by its sacredness; any place inaccessible to an enemy. The
high hills are a refuge for the wild goats. Psalms 104:18. The Lord also will be a refuge for the
oppressed. Psalms 9:9. 3. An expedient TO SECURE PROTECTION or defense. This last old
man - their latest refuge was to send to him. 4. Expedient, in general. Light must be supplied,

!1061
 among graceful refuges, by terracing any story in danger of darkness. Cities of refuge among
the Israelites, certain cities appointed to secure the safety of such persons as might commit
homicide without design. Of these there were three on each side of Jordan. Joshua 20:2. - verb
transitive - To shelter; to protect. (Webs1828)

—=—

Do we not seek out the United States as refugees from both God’s Law and from the States (People
and their/our lands) upon which we are born? Is the birth certiÞcate not the legal evidence of this
fact, and do not our own actions serve as a conÞrmation of consent to that protection and safety
offered by that artiÞcial womb of the nation and through its public personhood?

Why do we not seek refuge in our very own Origin of Nature, of True Self, and in the God of that
indefatigable Realm? To ask the correct question, why do we not follow and act as the exempliÞed
Son (Word) of God shows us?

—=—

“And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who

believe, according to the working of his mighty power, Which he
wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his
own right hand in the heavenly places, FAR ABOVE ALL
PRINCIPALITY, and power, and might, and dominion, AND EVERY
NAME THAT IS NAMED, not only in this world (age, period of time),
BUT ALSO IN THAT WHICH IS TO COME…”
—Ephesians 1:21, KJB

—=—

All common, vulgar men and thus their offspring (issues) have been or are in the process of being
personiÞed as the goyim of the multitudes within the combination (conspiracy) of (united) nations,
of being Romanized into that legal system of a game of thrones, the sport of nations. All men by
their strawmen persons are to be given a false sense of paper social security that is corporately only
a Latinized id-entity steeped in the pure falsehood of that Roman legal Þction and centralized
through that beast of many heads (many capitals, principalities) called the United Nations, that
towering heap of Babel (confusion, disorder). All roads lead to Rome, for all places have been
Romanized and districted (distressed) under Caesar (seizure).

Truth be told, Rome is not an actual place, merely a civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction as words on
paper enforced by fools who pledge their actual Lives to its Þctional existence. All roads, in other
words, are virtual waterways on the sea of international commerce that lead to the Þction of
“Rome.” It takes not soldiers or police to be forcibly Romanized, only the word-craft and trickery of
those confounding language arts. We are bound only by our use of that dog-Latin of the English
language, illiterately speaking ourselves into a false existence under the rendering and distraint of
Caesar.

Pay close attention here, for the following terms deÞne the procession of our enslavement by the
words of art hidden by such a purposefully induced language barrier.

ROMAN - adjective - [Latin Romanus, from Roma, the PRINCIPAL CITY of the Romans in
Italy. Rome is the oriental name Ramah, ELEVATED, that is, A HILL; for fortresses and towns
were often placed on hills for security; Hebrew to be HIGH, TO RAISE.] 1. Pertaining to

!1062
 Rome, or to the roman people. 2. Romish; popish; PROFESSING THE RELIGION OF THE
POPE. Roman catholic, as an adjective, denoting the RELIGION PROFESSED BY THE
PEOPLE OF ROME AND OF ITALY, at the head of which is the pope or bishop of Rome; as
a noun, ONE WHO ADHERES TO THE PAPAL RELIGION. - noun - 1. A NATIVE of rome.
2. A CITIZEN of Rome; ONE ENJOYING THE PRIVILEGES OF A ROMAN CITIZEN. 3.
ONE OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH at Rome to which Paul addressed an epistle,
CONSISTING OF CONVERTS FROM JUDAISM OR PAGANISM. (Webs1828)

CATHOLIC - adjective - 1. UNIVERSAL OR GENERAL; as the catholic church. Originally

this epithet was given to THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH IN GENERAL, but is now
appropriated to the ROMISH CHURCH, and in strictness THERE IS NO CATHOLIC
CHURCH, OR UNIVERSAL CHRISTIAN COMMUNION. The epithet is sometimes set in
opposition to heretic, sectary or schismatic. 2. LIBERAL; NOT NARROW MINDED,
PARTIAL or bigoted; as a catholic man. 3. LIBERAL; AS CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES. Catholic
epistles, the epistles of the apostles which are addressed to ALL THE FAITHFUL, AND NOT
TO A PARTICULAR CHURCH. - noun - A PAPIST. (Webs1828)

CATHOLICISM - noun - 1. Adherence to the Catholic church. 2. UNIVERSALITY, or the

orthodox faith of the whole church. 3. MORE GENERALLY, LIBERALITY OF
SENTIMENTS. This is the renowned seat of Catholicism. (Webs1828)

CATHOLICON - noun - A REMEDY FOR ALL DISEASES; A UNIVERSAL REMEDY; a

remedy supposed to be efÞcacious in purging away all humors; A PANACEA; a kind of soft
purgative ELECTUARY so called. (Webs1828)

CATHARTIC, CATHARTICAL - adjective - PURGING; CLEANSING THE BOWELS;

promoting evacuations by stool; purgative. - noun - A medicine that promotes alvine
discharges, and thus cleanses the stomach and bowels; a purge; a purgative. (Webs1828)

PURGATORY - adjective - [Latin purgatorius, from purgo, to purge.] Tending to cleanse;

cleansing; expiatory. - noun - Among catholics, A SUPPOSED PLACE or state after death, in
which the souls of persons are puriÞed, or in which they expiate such offenses committed in
this life, as do not merit eternal damnation. After this purgation from the impurities of sin,
the souls are supposed to be received into heaven. (Webs1828)

—=—

“As soon as a coin in the coffer rings, 


a soul from purgatory springs.”
—Johann Tetzel, German Roman Catholic Dominican friar and preacher, Grand Inquisitor of Heresy to Poland, and later Grand Commissioner for indulgences in
Germany, reputedly known for granting indulgences in exchange for money, an act to which Martin Luther deposed

—=—

CATH-ARIST - noun - ONE WHO PRETENDS TO MORE PURITY THAN OTHERS

POSSESS. (Webs1828)

POPE - noun - [Low Latin PAPA.] 1. The BISHOP of Rome, the HEAD of the catholic church.
(Webs1828)

PAPA - noun - [Latin PAPA.] FATHER; a word with us USED BY CHILDREN. (Webs1828)

BISHOP - noun - [Latin episcopus; Gr. of, over, and inspector, or visitor; to view, or inspect;
whence, to visit; also, to view. This Greek and Latin word accompanied the introduction of
christianity into the west and north of Europe.] 1. AN OVERSEER; A SPIRITUAL

!1063
 SUPERINTENDENT, RULER OR DIRECTOR; APPLIED TO CHRIST. Ye were as sheep
going astray, but are now returned to the shepherd and bishop of your souls. 1. Pet. 2. 2. In the
primitive church, a spiritual overseer; an elder or presbyter; one who had the pastoral care
of a church. The same persons are in this chapter called elders or presbyters, and overseers or
bishops. Scott, Comm. Acts 20:1. Till the churches were multiplied, the bishops and
presbyters were the same. Ib. Philippians 1:1. 1. Tim.3.1. Titus 1:7. Both the Greek and Latin
fathers do, with one consent, declare, that bishops were called presbyters, and presbyters
bishops, in apostolic times, the name being then common. 3. In the Greek, Latin, and some
Protestant churches, a prelate, or PERSON CONSECRATED FOR THE SPIRITUAL
GOVERNMENT AND DIRECTION of a diocese. In Great Britain, BISHOPS ARE
NOMINATED BY THE KING, who, upon request of the dean and chapter, for leave to elect a
bishop sends a conge d'elire, OR LICENSE TO ELECT, with a letter missive, NOMINATING
THE PERSON WHOM HE WOULD HAVE CHOSEN. The election, by the chapter, must be
made within twelve days, OR THE KING HAS A RIGHT TO APPOINT WHOM HE
PLEASES. Bishops are consecrated by an archbishop, with two assistant bishops. A BISHOP
MUST BE THIRTY YEARS OF AGE; and all bishops, except the bishop of Man, ARE
PEERS OF THE REALM. By the canons of the Protestant Episcopal church in the United
States, no diocese or state shall proceed to the election of a bishop unless there are at least six
ofÞciating presbyters RESIDING therein, who shall be QUALIFIED, ACCORDING TO
THE CANONS (NOT SCRIPTURE), TO VOTE FOR A BISHOP; a majority of whom at least
must concur in the election. But the conventions of two or more dioceses, OR STATES, having
together nine or more such presbyters, may join in the election of a bishop. A convention is
composed of the clergy, and a lay delegation, consisting of one or more members from each
parish. IN EVERY STATE, THE BISHOP IS TO BE CHOSEN ACCORDING TO SUCH
RULES AS THE CONVENTION OF THAT STATE SHALL ORDAIN (AGAIN, NOT
SCRIPTURE). The mode of election, in most or all of the states, IS BY A CONCURRENT
VOTE OF THE CLERGY AND LAITY, in convention, each body voting separately. Before a
bishop can be consecrated, he must receive a testimonial of approbation from the General
Convention of the church (NOT FROM JEHOVAH); or if that is not in session, from a
majority of the standing committee in the several dioceses. The mode of consecrating
bishops and ordaining priests and deacons differs not essentially from the practice in
England. - noun - A cant word for a mixture of wine, oranges, and sugar. - verb transitive - TO
CONFIRM; TO ADMIT SOLEMNLY (BY OATH) INTO THE CHURCH. 1. Among horse-
dealers, TO USE ARTS to make an old horse look like a young one, or TO GIVE A GOOD
APPEARANCE TO A BAD HORSE. (Webs1828)

—=—

To state that the ofÞce of Pope, as the most highly acclaimed ÒbishopÓ of the Catholic (universal)
Christian religion, has absolutely nothing to do with Jehovah in all of its ofÞcial artiÞce and
election is perhaps the understatement of the age. So let us now discover, through the incremental
deÞning and thus unlocking of these terms of art, the self-evident Truth of the artiÞcial nature of
that abomination to all that is Good and True under God named as Òthe pope.Ó

POPISH - adjective - RELATING TO THE POPE; taught by the pope; pertaining to the pope
or to the CHURCH OF ROME; AS POPISH TENETS OR CEREMONIES. (Webs1828)

POPERY - noun - THE RELIGION of the church of Rome, comprehending DOCTRINES

AND PRACTICES. (Webs1828)

POPISHLY - adverb - In a popish manner; with a tendency to popery; as, TO BE POPISHLY

AFFECTED OR INCLINED. (Webs1828)

ROMISH - adjective - [from Rome.] BELONGING OR RELATING TO ROME, or to the

religion professed by the people of Rome and of the western empire, of which Rome was
the metropolis; CATHOLIC; POPISH; AS THE ROMISH CHURCH; THE ROMISH
RELIGION, RITUAL OR CEREMONIES. (Webs1828)

!1064
ROMANIZE - verb transitive - 1. TO LATINIZE; TO FILL WITH LATIN WORDS OR
MODES OF SPEECH. 2. TO CONVERT to the Roman catholic religion, or TO PAPISTICAL
OPINIONS. - verb intransitive - TO CONFORM TO ROMISH OPINIONS, CUSTOMS OR
MODES OF SPEECH. (Webs1828)

ROMANIZED - participle passive - LATINIZED. (Webs1828)

ROMANISM - noun - The tenets of the church of Rome. (Webs1828)

ROMANIST - noun - An adherent to THE PAPAL RELIGION; a Roman catholic. (Webs1828)

ROMANCE - noun - Romans', ro’mans. 1. A fabulous relation or story of adventures and

incidents, DESIGNED FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT OF READERS; a tale of extraordinary
adventures, FICTITIOUS and often EXTRAVAGANT, USUALLY A TALE OF LOVE OR
WAR, subjects interesting the sensibilities of the heart, or the passions of wonder and curiosity.
Romance differs from the novel, as IT TREATS OF GREAT ACTIONS AND EXTRA-
ORDINARY ADVENTURES; that is, according to the Welch signiÞcation, IT VAULTS OR
SOARS BEYOND THE LIMITS OF FACT AND REAL LIFE, AND OFTEN OF PROB-
ABILITY. The Þrst romances were a monstrous assemblage of HISTORIES, IN WHICH
TRUTH AND FICTION WERE BLENDED WITHOUT PROBABILITY; a composition of
amorous adventures and the extravagant ideas of chivalry. 2. A FICTION. - verb intransitive -
romans', ro'mans. TO FORGE AND TELL FICTITIOUS STORIES; TO DEAL IN extravagant
stories. (Webs1828)

ROMANCING - participle present tense - INVENTING and telling FICTITIOUS tales;

building castles in the air. (Webs1828)

ROMANCER - noun - 1. One who INVENTS FICTITIOUS STORIES. 2. A WRITER OF

ROMANCE. (Webs1828)

ROMANTIC - adjective - 1. Pertaining to romance, or resembling it; wild; fanciful;

extravagant; as a romantic taste; romantic notions; romantic expectations; romantic zeal. 2.
Improbably or CHIMERICAL; FICTITIOUS; as a romantic tale. 3. Fanciful; wild; full of
wild or fantastic scenery; as a romantic prospect or landscape; A ROMANTIC SITUATION.
(Webs1828)

CHIMERICAL - adjective - Merely IMAGINARY; fanciful; fantastic; wildly or VAINLY

CONCEIVED; that has, or CAN HAVE NO EXISTENCE EXCEPT IN THOUGHT.
(Webs1828)

CHIMERA - noun - 1. In fabulous history, a monster with three heads, that of a lion, of a goat,
and of a dragon, vomiting ßames. The foreparts of the body were those of a lion, the middle
was that of a goat, and the hinder parts were those of a dragon; supposed to represent a
volcanic mountain in Lycia, whose top was the resort of lions, the middle, that of goats, and
the foot, that of serpents. Hence, 2. In modern usage, A VAIN OR IDLE FANCY; A
CREATURE OF THE IMAGINATION, COMPOSED OF CONTRADICTIONS OR
ABSURDITIES, THAT CAN HAVE NO EXISTENCE EXCEPT IN THOUGHT. (Webs1828)

CHIMERICALLY - adverb - Wildly; VAINLY; fancifully; FANTASTICALLY. (Webs1828)

ROMANTICALLY - adverb - Wildly; extravagantly. (Webs1828)

ROMANTICNESS - noun - 1. Wildness; extravagance; fancifulness. 2. Wildness of scenery.

(Webs1828)

FANTASY - noun - Now written FANCY, which see. Is not this something more than fantasy?
(Webs1828)

!1065
FANTASTIC, FANTASTICAL - adjective - [Gr. VISION, fancy, from TO APPEAR.] 1.
Fanciful; PRODUCED OR EXISTING ONLY IN IMAGINATION; IMAGINARY; NOT
REAL; CHIMERICAL 2. Having the nature of phantom; APPARENT ONLY. 3. Unsteady;
irregular. 4. Whimsical; capricious; fanciful; INDULGING THE VAGARIES OF
IMAGINATION; as fantastic minds; a fantastic mistress. 5. Whimsical; odd. (Webs1828)

FANCY - noun - [CONTRACTED FROM FANTASY, Latin phantasia. Gr. from TO CAUSE TO
APPEAR, TO SEEM, TO IMAGINE, FROM TO SHOW, TO APPEAR, TO SHINE. The
primary sense seems to be to open, or to shoot forth.] 1. THE FACULTY BY WHICH THE
MIND FORMS IMAGES OR REPRESENTATIONS OF THINGS AT PLEASURE. It is often
used as SYNONYMOUS WITH IMAGINATION; but imagination is rather the power of
combining and modifying our conceptions. 2. AN OPINION OR NOTION. I have always
had a fancy that learning might be made a play and recreation to children. 3. Taste;
CONCEPTION. The little chapel called the salutation in very neat, and built with a pretty
fancy. 4. IMAGE; conception; THOUGHT. How now, my lord, why do you keep alone; Of
sorriest fancies your companions making? 5. INCLINATION; LIKING. Take that which
SUITS your fancy. How does this STRIKE your fancy? His fancy lay to traveling. 6. LOVE.
Tell me where is fancy bred? 7. Caprice; humor; whim; as an odd or strange fancy. True worth
shall gain me, that it may be said, Desert, not fancy once a woman led. 8. FALSE NOTION. 9.
SOMETHING THAT PLEASES OR ENTERTAINS WITHOUT REAL USE OR VALUE.
London-pride is a pretty fancy for borders. - verb intransitive - TO IMAGINE; TO FIGURE TO
ONE'S SELF; TO BELIEVE OR SUPPOSE WITHOUT PROOF. All may not be our enemies
whom we fancy to be so. If our search has reached no farther than simile and metaphor, we
rather fancy than know. - verb transitive - 1. To form a conception of; TO PORTRAY IN THE
MIND; TO IMAGINE. He whom I fancy but can ne'er express. 2. TO LIKE; TO BE PLEASED
WITH, PARTICULARLY ON ACCOUNT OF EXTERNAL APPEARANCE OR MANNERS.
We fancy a PERSON for beauty and accomplishment. We sometimes fancy a lady at Þrst
sight, whom, on acquaintance, we cannot esteem. (Webs1828)

FANTASM - noun - [Gr. from TO APPEAR. Usually written phantasm.] THAT WHICH
APPEARS TO THE IMAGINATION; a phantom; SOMETHING NOT REAL. (Webs1828)

FANTASTICALLY - adverb - 1. BY THE POWER OF IMAGINATION. 2. IN A FANTASTIC

MANNER; capriciously; unsteadily. Her scepter so fantastically home. 3. Whimsically; IN
COMPLIANCE WITH FANCY. (Webs1828)

FANTASTICALNESS - noun - Compliance with fancy; humorousness; whimsicalness;

UNREASONABLENESS; caprice. (Webs1828)

STORIER - noun - A relater of stories; A HISTORIAN. (Webs1828)

STORIFY - verb transitive - To FORM or tell stories. (Webs1828)

STORIAL - adjective - [from story.] HISTORICAL. (Webs1828)

STORIED - adjective - [from story.] 1. FURNISHED with stories; ADORNED WITH

HISTORICAL PAINTINGS. Some greedy minion or imperious wife, the trophied arches,
storied halls, invade. 2. RELATED IN STORY; TOLD OR RECITED IN HISTORY.
(Webs1828)

ROMANSH - noun - The language of the Grisons in Switzerland, a corruption of the Latin.
(Webs1828)

ROMEPENNY, ROMESCOT - noun - A TAX of a penny on a house, formerly PAID BY THE

PEOPLE OF ENGLAND TO THE CHURCH OF ROME. (Webs1828)

!1066
 ROMAN LAW - In a general sense, comprehends ALL THE LAWS WHICH PREVAILED
AMONG THE ROMANS, without regard to the TIME of their origin, including the
collections of Justinian. In a more restricted sense, the Germans understand by this term
merely the law of Justinian, as ADOPTED by them. IN ENGLAND AND AMERICA, IT
APPEARS TO BE CUSTOMARY TO USE THE PHRASE, INDIFFERENTLY WITH "THE
CIVIL LAW," TO DESIGNATE THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF ROMAN JURISPRUDENCE,
including the Corpus Juris Civilis; or, if any distinction is drawn, the expression "CIVIL
LAW" denotes the system of jurisprudence obtaining in those countries of continental
Europe which have derived their juridical notions and principles FROM THE JUSTINIAN
COLLECTION, while "Roman law" is reserved as the proper appellation of THE BODY OF
LAW DEVELOPED UNDER THE GOVERNMENT OF ROME from the earliest times to the
fall of the empire. (Black4)

CORPUS JURIS - A body of law. A term used to signify a book comprehending several
collections of law. There are two principal collections to which this name is given; the Corpus
Juris Civilis, and the Corpus Juris Canonici. Also name of an encyclopedic statement of THE
PRINCIPLES OF ANGLO- AMERICAN LAW. (Black4)

CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS - The body of the CIVIL LAW. The system of ROMAN
JURISPRUDENCE compiled and codiÞed under the direction of the emperor Justinian, in
A.D. 528-534. This collection comprises the Institutes, Digest (or Pandects), Code, and Novels.
The name is said to have been Þrst applied to this collection early in the seventeenth century.
(Black4)

CORPUS JURIS CANONICI - The body of the CANON LAW. A compilation of the canon
law, comprising the decrees and canons of THE ROMAN CHURCH, constituting the body
of ecclesiastical law of that church. (Black4)

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH - The JURISTIC PERSONALITY of the Roman Catholic

Church, with the RIGHT to sue and TO TAKE AND HOLD PROPERTY, has been
recognized by all systems of European law from the fourth century. It was formally
recognized between Spain and the Papacy and by Spanish laws from the beginning of the
settlements in the Indies, also by our treaty with Spain in 1898, WHEREBY ITS PROPERTY
RIGHTS WERE SOLEMNLY SAFE-GUARDED. To the same effect as to the Philippines.
(Black4)

—=—

So what is the Pope?

What lies have you told yourself about “the pope” while its self-evidence is nowhere to be found?
What is the source of that title?

Can you honestly answer that question in any other way than to see a frail, artfully elected man
acting as some thing when in Reality he is no thing at all, as the title of a purely legal ofÞce
consisting of the adversarial mix of the Water of the Gladness of God and the ceremonial, ritualistic
anointing oils of the false church? The bishop in this perpetual game of chess is always right next to
the king and queen, peripherally overseeing and domineering at both their right and left hands,
standing upon both their shoulders in the conjoined dualism of the white devil and the black angel,
always protective of that militarized Þction that ensures the churchÕs own very false existence in
only the art of that legal name and ßattering title. And the chess-master uses the multitude of
pawns and supposedly noble knights and rooks in their fee and feudatory pledge of surety to
protect the head persons (a quorum of corporate ofÞcers and advisers/worm-tongues) standing as
the current church and state in sole corporation at all costs. For the life of the Þction must survive
even the deadliest of opposing feuds and artiÞcial systems, and the plebes are always the most
expendable assets of such a jurisdictional gaol (a prison, from Latin carcer, as in incarceration).

!1067
Of course the more modern nuclear and biological weapon options might leave only the puppets
with no masters.

The Roman Catholic Church is a legal, artiÞcial person (corporation), not a spiritual People. How
else could it be said to have a Òjuristic personalityÓ in and of its artiÞcial self (a false persona) in law if
it were not considered and respected by law as a single legal (anti-God, anti-Nature, antichrist)
person? Never forget that the legal law is blind to True religious actions done in the Purest of Truth,
Love, and Charity. These are therefore never the traits of any legal corporation or other person.
That which the legal law of man respects is always hated by God. The legal law does not respect
True religion or True religious men. This is to say that it cannot respect these for it cannot see them
through Þctional eyes. True religion and True religious men have no person (status) in law, and so
no law may be attached to them in surety. The self-evident Truth of Nature respects not the artiÞce
and law of man, suffering it only until it democratically kills itself under its own non-Existent
weight.

And yes, its laws are the originating laws and principles we follow today, plus all of the millions of
additions and amendments in the modern lex scripta. We are a confused, confounded, self-
destructing, Romanized people.

JURIST - noun - [Latin jus, juris, law.] 1. A man who PROFESSES THE SCIENCE OF LAW;
one versed in the law, or more particularly, in the civil law; a civilian. 2. One versed in THE
LAW OF NATIONS, or who writes on the subject. (Webs1828)

JURISTIC - Pertaining or BELONGING TO, OR CHARACTERISTIC OF,

JURISPRUDENCE, OR A JURIST, OR THE LEGAL PROFESSION. (Black4)

—=—

Can legal or ecclesiastical law also be science? More to the point, can the law be a Natural Science,
as that cherished method which seeks to destroy all lies and discover the Truth and Real Nature of
all things? Is the legal law found anywhere in Nature? And to this point, to call manÕs law as a
ÒscienceÓ seems only to prove the illegitimacy of what Þctional recreations man has placed under
the ßattering title of Òscience.Ó Under legal terms, under any Þction that is, what sin cannot be
labeled as a science? What lie cannot be told and upheld in the false righteousness of ßattering
titles?

So is the whole of the legal law of man merely a strange journey into the imaginary realms of
science Þction? Are not the created laws of any imaginary realm the science of any Þction? Is not the
author of any imaginary realm of Þction also its creator god and lawmaker? And are not the
greatest Þctions ever told simply the many histories of those ancient gods of the old nations? The
reader will suffer the author his privacy here, leaving that contemplation to myself, and instead
will let this work stand as its own testament and apocalyptic revealing of the origin that artiÞce of
law as a legal science so very steeped in manufactured history, weaponized anthropology, and
falsiÞed archaeology.

But there is an even more devious notion being brought forward here. For to be Romanized is not
merely to be conquered physically by that empire in some violent military campaign of war and
oppression as in days of old. No, we are defeated by the words of a political campaign, proscribed
(doomed/prejudged) under treaties and international commercial laws of the nations, and by the
very romish dog-Latin we have been trained to speak. We are all acting catholicly, because catholic
only means generally, commonly, and universally pledged in collective deceit, as a united nations
of popishly acting “liberal” goyim under a universal religion of popish “Christianity.” It is a title of
romanized ceremony and doctrinal code, stripped from the Bible that was written, kept a mystery,
and read only by the catholic priesthood for centuries until modernly re-visioned into a scientiÞc,
pagan doctrine of legalistic law. All “Christian” nations lead to Rome, for Rome is only a legal,
artiÞcial person itself. It is the Romanized language that conquers the minds of men through

!1068
language arts, not some army. What Rome is cannot be reduced to a mere geographical place on the
earth. It is the tree of knowledge of good and evil personiÞed into a global corporate structure, a
coded matrix, its priests the serpents of the Þgments of our imaginations. To be Romanized is to be
Latinized, which is to be manipulated into speaking a version of the Latin language of that ofÞce of
a Roman pagan chimera, speaking itself into the false existence of a legal perpetuity via the
inheritable corporation sole. It is our consistent use of dog-Latin (general/catholic/universal low
English) that enslaves us to that Latinized system of law (lex scripta) without the slightest
contemplation.

—=—

“Vernacular Bible: Biblia Sacra - Vulgate Editions…

“Pope Damasus I commissioned Saint Jerome, in 382, to revise the Vetus Latina, which was the
compendium of all biblical texts, translated into LATIN. Jerome’s product became known as
“versio vulgata,” or “COMMON VERSION.” It was the translation used most often from then
on throughout Western Europe, and from 400 to about 1530, THE LATIN VULGATE WAS
THE ONE AND ONLY BIBLE MOST WESTERN EUROPEANS EVER ENCOUNTERED. It
is, in fact, STILL THE ONLY OFFICIAL BIBLE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

“Nothing is wrong with any of this, because Jerome’s translation is perfectly accurate and at its
time of publication Latin was spoken throughout most of Europe. It is, more or less, THE
KING JAMES VERSION IN LATIN, SINCE THE KING JAMES TRANSLATORS USED IT
AS ONE OF THEIR PRIMARY GUIDES. But the problem arose when the commoners
throughout Europe told their priests, who told their bishops, who told the popes, THAT
THE COMMONERS DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE FIRST THING ABOUT LATIN. IT
WAS NOT SPOKEN EXCEPT IN CHURCH CEREMONIES, AND THUS, IN ORDER TO
LEARN IT, THE COMMONERS HAD TO GET THEIR PRIESTS TO TEACH THEM. But
the priests would not bother teaching them. Why?

“BECAUSE KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAD ALL OF

BOTH. For about 1,000 years, the Bible remained well known ONLY TO THE CHURCH
OFFICIALS, clergy of all orders, and an elect few well educated scholars. It was never
counter to any Papal Bull for any person to translate the Bible into another language.
However, anyone who intended to do so was STRONGLY ADMONISHED by the Pope
himself, with every archbishop, bishop and priest of the continent TOLD NOT TO
TRANSLATE THE BIBLE INTO ANY LANGUAGE BESIDES BIBLICAL HEBREW,
ANCIENT GREEK OR LATIN. THESE THREE LANGUAGES WERE ALMOST DEAD AT
THE TIME, MEANING NO ONE SPOKE THEM COMMONLY.”

—Flamehorse website, excerpt from: ‘Top 10 Shameful Moments in Catholic History,’ June 8, 2011

—=—

Today we too unwittingly speak a dead language. But its death is not due to disuse. Rather, while
the commoners who speak it generally communicate decently enough between each other, our
words fall upon dead ears when we attempt to use them to the priest class, the magistracy, the only
users of those dead languages. To them, we speak as a mass of blubbering fools and are treated as
such. It is not the language that is dead, but its users, babbling brooks issuing worthless streams of
words without conscious thought behind them. And so the Bible goes on today, as it was then,
unread and misunderstood but by that priest class.

William Tyndale, author of the Þrst English translation of the Bible from the Greek and Hebrew
texts, was executed by strangulation in 1534 for his “heretic” efforts, as his writings were against
the pope’s universal control of kings, leading to the more modern concept of the “divine right of
kings.Ó This divine right was speciÞcally anti-catholic (anti-universal), as controlled opposition.

!1069
And it is important to note that the 54 scholars that compiled the “King James” Bible in 1611 drew
heavily from Tyndall’s translations. It was apparently the logic and reasoning of Tyndale’s booklet
“The Obedience of a Christian Man…” that allowed King Henry VIII to break the Church of
England from the Roman Catholic Church. Obviously there is more to this story of independence,
but Tyndall’s quotes help to comprehend the importance of English as the language of illiteracy, a
critique on the mysteries and use of Latin by the priest-class to an English-only speaking people.

—=—

“How can we whet (put into practice, use and exercise) God’s Word upon
our children and household, WHEN WE ARE VIOLENTLY KEPT
FROM IT AND KNOW IT NOT? …On the holy days which were
ordained to preach God’s word, set up long ceremonies, long matins,
long masses and long evensongs, AND ALL IN LATIN THAT THEY
UNDERSTAND NOT, AND ROLL THEM IN DARKNESS, THAT YE
MAY LEAD THEM WHITHER YE WILL… AND YET PAUL (WAS…)
FORBIDDETH TO SPEAK IN THE CHURCH OR CONGREGATION
SAVE IN THE TONGUE THAT ALL UNDERSTAND.”
—William Tyndale, quoted from: ‘The Obedience of a Christian Man…”

—=—

I certainly do not support the idea of any divine right of any king, or in the case of the United
States, any sovereignty called as a “People,” to bear and hide True knowledge merely to keep
power over the masses of induced, entrained, and impressed illiterates. This history is included
here only to reinforce the fact that all kings were beholden not to God alone, but to the Roman god
of the Catholic Church. Kings ruled only through the middle-man and vicar of christ that the pope
still to this day pretends to be. And so this helps us to understand the origins of this divine right,
psychopathic as it may be. And from that same tune of psychopathy, the American exceptionalism of
the private landholding “People” stems, entrained even into their beholden, voluntarily subjective
citizen-ship.

Ironically, Tyndall’s premise was based on the fact that Jesus proclaimed that each man
individually should read the Bible, for only then may he be able to recognize just who were the
false prophets. And whom else but the very priest-class did Jesus himself call out in the Bible as
being such false prophets, whose false doctrines could only lead men away from Jehovah? In this
way, a man might know a good king from bad. And also in this way, the commonalty of the United
States should certainly know their own leaders for what they are, if they were only to be able to
read the Bible as intended and not for their own personal ÒÞlthyÓ lucre and gain in mammon and
in support of pointless world wars.

Think of it this way… for those who have studied the trivium method as to the application of the
liberal arts in the speciÞcally ordered use and communication of grammar Þrst, then logic, and then
and only then rhetoric, we must obviously be conscious of the source of our foundation of grammar
(knowledge) lest our logic (dialectic) fail and become a false belief (love), while our rhetoric
(speech) shines only in the false light of our self-induced and conÞdent ignorance. To this end, let
us not forget that the English language is the language of intentional illiteracy, as called as dog-
Latin. And so it is very dangerous to place one’s knowledge upon a pedestal over other English-
speakers, and especially over those that operate in and practice any higher language, when that
knowledge is based in a language designed to obfuscate the origin and True meaning of most
words. It is therefore doubly dangerous to insist upon possessing proper logic and reason based

!1070
upon such knowledge in our rhetorical diatribe, for our logic is only as good as our grammar, and
the source of all English grammar is purposefully and thus often accidentally tainted towards
being of the adversaria, often by men with otherwise good intent. In other words, our history has
been Romanized. Our history is merely a strung together tale of romantic, fantastical stories de-
signed to enforce the big legal lie. The characters of our conÞrmed lies called ÒhistoriesÓ are
portrayed as gods and heroes, steeped with bravery and seemingly supernatural powers, with
hardly the notion that these were often only frail men underneath their fantastically gloriÞed titles
and romantic deeds and habits. Even the founders of the United States appear in our fabled history
as the supposed godfathers and Þghters of Natural Liberty, though nothing they accomplished was
in any way original or moral. Just ask those they allowed to be commercially enslaved! And ask
yourself again after reading this work just what is their purpose and intent.

Unfortunately, if we are to examine history and literature honestly by these standards in their
artfully tainted language, we must include one of the most Romanized books ever to be in
Existence; that of the Holy Bible. One cannot deny that in America we for the most part read the
Bible, in general, only in its translated English (dog-Latin) version. This is not unlike the times of
old when only the priest class was allowed the privilege and ability of learning to read and write in
otherwise dead languages to the common goyim. Today, the commoners read the Bible without
under-standing, not due to any lack of the ability to read, but instead due to their heavily ingrained
English-only language barrier. Our logic is therefore in general ßawed, not by any fault or lack of
effort on the part of the man in subjection who might master that low and mean language with the
best of intentions if he were not publicly governed (controlled) not to do so, but only because he
has not the proper tool of language to accomplish the correct grammar that would correct his false
dialectic caused by his sole use of dog-Latin. And so while the illiterates of yesterday had no grasp
of the artful use of language, the illiterates of today believe they have a full grasp on a language
that is secretly designed to confuse and mislead them and to cause a false dialectic, logical fallacy,
with few ever contemplating it as a bastard language borrowed and stolen from many other
sources. Some are even very clever in their use, even awarded prizes for their discourses and tragic
Þctions, dramas, and comedies.

English is somewhat of a simulacrum, a copy with no original source, for the original sources are
many and some are merely copies of others. One is left to wonder which people had a worse
situation — those in known ancient ignorance or we of modern arrogance of the same? At least
those who could not read or write actually knew of their own illiteracy.

—=—

“If names are not correct, LANGUAGE WILL NOT BE IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE TRUTH OF THINGS.”
—Confucius

—=—

Whatever the case, we must break free from this Þctional cage of word magic. We must break the
language barrier. We must remain only in the singular Realm of Nature, in Reality, where our
words mean One and only One thing without artiÞce and without property. It is only that respect
of the power and authority of words that is the problem, not the words themselves. Only when
Reality is more Real than the Þctions used to re-present It by name and description will language
cease to be used to conquer (purchase) all people.

This dualism of words in writing and in law must be put to an end. Men will always conspire in
confederation by attempting to use words as tools for the dis-ease and enslavement of all others.
And so it is only individually all men that may free their minds of this word-simulation and legal
code, and to teach their children well.

!1071
But the name of the legal game is piracy. We have been locked in a battle of the spirit for many
generations, a war for the mind, body, and soul of the common man. The object of that victory is to
legally steal the landed estates of most men, by tricking them into abandoning their heirs, their
offspring, their children to the legal state. By artiÞcially corrupting the inheritable blood of most
children through the registration and delivery certiÞcation process of birth, the land held through
prescription or by other means is reverted back to the Þrst grantor, which is in the ÒtrustÓ and
territory of the United States on behalf of each of the several (private) States in compact. The
government through its many agencies may only hold that land in the trust of Òthe PeopleÓ until
one of the bloodline People of each State then claims that land as a legitimate private land-holder,
and so passes it by law and by blood to his own legitimate heirs in consanguinity. This is in a
clandestine way merely outright theft, as piracy of the sea. And all it requires is absolute ignorance
through a continuous, circular public education process of all parents and children, so that they
may never even imagine their own inheritable rights ever existed in the Þrst place. This process of
publicity, of delivery into the seizure of government’s district in distraint, has been streamlined and
normalized as a part of the custom of our national societies, as has the Social Security systems that
are now in over 140 countries around the world, all controlled by the United Nations and the
World Bank under the International Social Security Association (ISSA). It is the ultimate, world-
wide governmental public scheme to kidnap all children into and under the international law of
nations, One big Þctionally registered (taxed) family under one Caesar, taking us all away from our
private, spiritual, Natural states of Being and marking (publishing) us as merely sons and
daughters of the nations. It is an attempt at the total abandonment of the Natural Law and of God,
replaced only by legal considerations, treaties, and declarations of human rights in commerce.
Human rights are merely animal rights. World government, as commercial globalism upon one
united sea (See), is upon us. It is the system of the beast, that is, men considered only as soulless
beasts of burden under a permanent, un-payable debt, performing the contractual script of the
devil.

And is this not exactly what the Bible warns us about: an international social security insurance
system as the numbering of all chattel beasts in the surety of false id-entities?

Meanwhile the church and state propaganda machines Þll the minds of false-religious men with
images of ÒThe BeastÓ as a monster with many heads that will wreak havoc upon the Earth. For the
church must hide the state’s plan to mark every man as an individual beast that makes up the
whole collective beast system as human capital management on an organized, global scale and
controlled centrally (federally). Inversely, the state must hide the church’s role by protecting its
secrets. The multitude is the communal beast, a body politic of all individual beasts. Many heads in
one system of capitalism. E Pluribus Unum; out of many one. This is the true essence of
demonology, where evil geniuses succeed in killing the spirits of men by possessing their minds
with Þctional, demonic concepts of law and personhood through the trickery of word-magic.

—=—

"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."


—Samuel Johnson, Anecdotes of the Reverend Percival Stockdale (reprinted in "Johnsonian Miscellanies", edited by G.B. Hill).

—=—

Ultimately, this whole piracy scheme is what is known as an ESCHEAT. By reverting all lands back
to the original grantor due to the simulation of death caused by birth to the blood-heirs of all
families, the commonality is completely stripped of all wealth and property, as well as any Real
prosperity in posterity, living only in the artiÞcial womb of the person and property of the very
pirates that took it all in the Þrst place. ItÕs like stealing your car and then renting it back to you
with tax and interest. They steal your home and land, allowing you to remain there as long as you

!1072
pay property tax on what is not actually the Real property and land of the very thief collecting
those taxes in exaction and extortion. And this is all done on paper, using only the terms of art we
have discussed.

So what is it to escheat an entire generation?

—=—

“Escheat is derived from the French word "eschoir," which signiÞes to

happen, because IT FALLS TO THE LORD FROM AN EVENT and from
an unforeseen circumstance.”
—ESCHZZTA DERIVATUR A VERB0 GALLIC0 ESCHOIR, QUOD EST ACCIDERE, QUIA ACCIDIT DOMINO EX EVENTU ET EX INSPERATO. Co.
Litt. 93. (Black4)

—=—

“Those things are commonly called "escheats" which REVERT to the

EXCHEQUER from a FAILURE OF ISSUE IN THOSE WHO HOLD OF
THE KING, WHEN THERE DOES NOT EXIST ANY HEIR BY
CONSANGUINITY.”
—ESCHAETAE VULGO DICUNTUR QUAE DECIDENTIBUS IIS QUAE DE REGE TENENT, CUM NON EXISTIT RATIONE SANGUINIS HAERES,
AD FISCUM RELABUNTUR. (Black4)

—=—

As the exchequer was only the agent of the king (principal), the United States and state
governments are only the agents of the pirates known as the sovereignty (sovereign People) of each
State. They are the private, landed (papered/pedigreed) lords. Our public persons are those
recorded events.

But how does the legal government (principal) make Living heirs appear to not Exist in the eyes of
the law?

Before moving on, we must understand the following term of art, disinheritance. And we must
understand that whether we know this information or this word and its meaning or not, our
submission to the law of persons and of this government as its subjects requires us to know the law.
Remember this maxim of the devilmasters… To be bound to know or to be able to know IS THE
SAME AS TO KNOW. It is your responsibility, your duty, to know the law you contract under.
There is no excuse. No man in his right mind would voluntarily become a United States citizenship
when the unknowable mountain of its laws are shown to him, laws that no man, even its creators,
may possibly know with completeness in one lifetime. But you certainly need to know, above all
else, that this is part of this devilish system of legal law of the United States so that you may
understand your own, voluntary victimhood and rape (seizing/privation) of your family’s lands
and estate by these pirates:

DISINHERITANCE - THE ACT BY WHICH A PERSON DEPRIVES HIS HEIR OF AN

INHERITANCE, who, without such act, would inherit. 2. BY THE COMMON LAW, ANY
ONE MAY GIVE HIS ESTATE TO A STRANGER, AND THEREBY DISINHERIT HIS HEIR
APPARENT. (Bouv1856)

—=—

!1073
It is the birth EVENT that simulates the abandonment of our heirs to the state, causing the severing
of any connection as an attainder of any blood relation to us and our private property. It is the legal
separation of the man from the land (in estate). The escheat happens when we physically die,
causing the end of our person (status) at law, and when our children are somehow nowhere to be
legitimately “found” by the state (the cheater). For the state legally hides our children’s blood from
us in consideration of its law of distribution. It’s just a cheap con game. A well organized, immoral,
legal land-grab.

—=—

“A patriot sets himself apart in his own country UNDER HIS OWN
FLAG, sneers at other nations and keeps AN ARMY OF UNIFORMED
ASSASSINS on hand at heavy expense TO GRAB SLICES OF OTHER
PEOPLE’S COUNTRIES AND KEEP THEM FROM GRABBING
SLICES OF HIS. In the intervals between campaigns he washes the blood
off his hands and works for ‘the universal brotherhood of man’ - with his
mouth.”
—Mark Twain, ‘The Lowest Animal’

—=—

“More often than not, THOSE LEADERS WHO RALLY THE PEOPLE
TO KILL OTHER PEOPLE IN THE NAME OF PATRIOTISM AND
NATIONALISM ARE USUALLY THEMSELVES MURDERERS, LIARS
AND THIEVES who through their power cause millions of others to
"kill, steal and destroy." SATAN IS WELL SERVED BY THESE
DEVIOUS TYRANTS.”
—Gary Amirault

—=—

But low and behold, the black magic of the legal language is clear that to purchase is to conquer.
No blood need be spilt if it can simply be pretended to be tainted, if the inheritable connection can
be severed by trickery of artful words.

The word escheat as a noun stems from the notion of THE REVERTING OF LAND TO A KING
OR LORD in certain cases, from the early 14th century and stemming from Anglo-French eschete
(late 13th century) and the Old French eschete "SUCCESSION, INHERITANCE," as literally "that
which FALLS to one," which is the noun use of feminine past participle of escheoir "happen, befall,
occur, take place; fall due; LAPSE (legally)," and from Late Latin excadere "to fall out," from Latin
ex- "out, away” aded to cadere "TO FALL,” and representing a restored form of excidere, which
yielded excise.

Of course, the noun escheat correlates to the verb cheat. The word cheat in the mid 15th century
carried the meaning of "to escheat," a shortening of Old French escheat, a legal term for REVISION
OF PROPERTY TO THE STATE WHEN THE OWNER DIES WITHOUT HEIRS, literally "that
which falls to oneÉÓ The royal ofÞcers evidently had a low reputation. Its meaning evolved
through the word "CONFISCATE" (mid-15th century) with the meaning of to "DEPRIVE
UNFAIRLY" (1580s). To cheat on (someone) as to "be sexually unfaithful" was only Þrst recorded
around 1934. Related: Cheated; cheating.

!1074
The author cannot stress enough how each of us have been cheated, or more properly escheated
out of our blood inheritance. We have been cheated out of our lands. We have been cheated out of
our children. We have been cheated out of our parents. We have been cheated out of our lineage.
And we have been cheated out of our God; out of our unalienable rights. This is the power of these
contracts made of the legalistic words of devils (attorneys). Before the heavenly lands of man may
be made to fall, Þrst the man must be made dead through his fall into a Þctional debtorÕs hell.

ESCHEAT - In feudal law. Escheat is AN OBSTRUCTION OF THE COURSE OF DESCENT,

AND CONSEQUENT DETERMINATION OF THE TENURE, by some unforeseen
contingency, in which case the land NATURALLY RESULTS BACK, BY A KIND OF
REVERSION, TO THE ORIGINAL GRANTOR, OR LORD OF THE FEE. It is the casual
descent, IN THE NATURE OF FORFEITURE, of lands and tenements within his manor, to a
lord, either on FAILURE OF ISSUE of the tenant DYING SEISED or on account of THE
FELONY OF SUCH TENANT. Also the land or fee itself, which thus FELL BACK TO THE
LORD. Such lands were called "excadentiae," or "terrae excadentiales." In American law. Escheat
signiÞes a reversion of property TO THE STATE in consequence of A WANT OF ANY
INDIVIDUAL COMPETENT TO INHERIT. THE STATE IS DEEMED TO OCCUPY THE
PLACE AND HOLD THE RIGHTS OF THE FEUDAL LORD. "Escheat at feudal law was the
right of the lord of a fee to re-enter upon the same WHEN IT BECAME VACANT BY THE
EXTINCTION OF THE BLOOD OF THE TENANT. This extinction might either be per
defectum sanguinis or else per delictum tenentis, WHERE THE COURSE OF DESCENT WAS
BROKEN BY THE CORRUPTION OF THE BLOOD OF THE TENANT. As a fee might be
holden either of the crown or from SOME INFERIOR LORD, the escheat was not always to
the crown. The word ‘escheat,' in this country, at the present time, MERELY INDICATES
THE PREFERABLE RIGHT OF THE STATE TO AN ESTATE LEFT VACANT, AND
WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY ONE IN EXISTENCE ABLE TO MAKE CLAIM
THERETO.” Single Escheat. When all a person's movables fall to the crown, AS A
CASUALTY, because of his being declared rebel. (Black4)

ESCHEAT - noun - [Latin cado, cadere.] 1. Any land or tenements which casually FALL or
REVERT to the lord within his manor, THROUGH FAILURE OF HEIRS. It is the
determination of the tenure or dissolution of the mutual bond between the lord and tenant,
from the EXTINCTION OF THE BLOOD of the tenant, BY DEATH OR NATURAL MEANS,
OR BY CIVIL MEANS, as FORFEITURE OR CORRUPTION OF BLOOD. 2. In the United
States, the FALLING OR PASSING of lands and tenements TO THE STATE, THROUGH
FAILURE OF HEIRS OR FORFEITURE, or in cases WHERE NO OWNER IS FOUND. 3. The
place or circuit within which the king or lord is entitled to escheats. 4. A writ to recover
escheats from the person in possession. 5. The lands which fall to the lord or state by escheat.
6. In Scots law, the forfeiture incurred by a man's being denounced a rebel. - verb intransitive -
In England, to revert, as land, to the lord of a manor, by means of the EXTINCTION OF THE
BLOOD OF THE TENANT. 1. In America, to fall or come, as land, TO THE STATE,
THROUGH FAILURE OF HEIRS OR OWNERS, or by forfeiture for treason. In the feudal
sense, no escheat can exist in the United States; BUT THE WORD IS USED IN STATUTES
CONFISCATING THE ESTATES OF THOSE WHO ABANDONED THEIR COUNTRY,
during the revolution, AND IN STATUTES GIVING TO THE STATE THE LANDS FOR
WHICH NO OWNER CAN BE FOUND. - verb transitive - To forfeit. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

ESCHEAT - In feudal law, the determination of the tenure or dissolution of the bond
between lord and tenant FROM EXTINCTION OF THE BLOOD OF THE LATTER BY
NATURAL OR CIVIL MEANS. Thus, IF THE TENANT DIED WITHOUT HEIRS OF HIS
BLOOD, OR IF HIS BLOOD WAS CORRUPTED BY COMMISSION OF TREASON OR
FELONY, WHEREBY THE INHERITABLE QUALITY WAS BLOTTED OUT, the land “fell
back” to the lord of the fee— the tenure being determined by breach of the condition. See
ATTAINDER. The word, originally French or Norman, signifying CHANCE or ACCIDENT,
now denotes OBSTRUCTION OF THE COURSE OF DESCENT, AND DETERMINATION
OF TENURE, by some unforeseen contingency; in which case the land NATURALLY

!1075
 RESULTS BACK, by a kind of REVERSION, TO THE ORIGINAL GRANTOR. See Descent.
3. IN THE UNITED STATES, A REVERSION OF PROPERTY TO THE STATE IN DEFAULT
OF A PERSON WHO CAN INHERIT IT. Depends upon POSITIVE STATUTE, WHICH
MAKES THE STATE THE HEIR OF THE PROPERTY. Nothing about it but the NAME is
feudal. (WCA1889)

—=—

Let us be clear here that the old feudal landlords and barons were the agents holding lands of the
feudal king. The conspiracy of People as the so-called sovereign landholders of today, as those
private citizens of the several States, are the combined (confederated) kingship of today, and we
their unwitting agents. The governments they create serve only as a simulation of the old land-
lords and barons (agents). In other words, the common people of the United States are tenants of
lands held by the land-holders in collective sovereignty, but we only deal with the landlords, which
we today call the agencies and agents of the federal and state governments, those artiÞcial persons
as creations of the kingship (We, the “white” People in blood posterity). And so while Mr.
Anderson is above certainly telling the Truth that this system of escheat is feudal in name only, the
Reality is that only the words and names have changed. The system is still of a feudal nature. The
only difference is that while yesterday that feud was not a choice and was instead under a complete
tyranny, today it’s a voluntary chattel system that can only exist as long as the common goyim (we
who are born of nations and whose father is the state/People) have no idea it’s happening and that
the consequences of our choices lead to that same exact system of old. The only difference is the
language. All else regarding that feudal system remains intact. It’s now only conducted under
contract law instead of monarchical and cannon law as a holy dictatorship. This is to say that these
cheats have Þgured out a way to trick us all into abandoning any common law consideration by
acting in a contractual relationship with a landlord (government), and so this action of what under
the common law is called as cheating is not recognized by the law of contracts, the law of nations.
To put it a different way, the law in its legitimate functionality is always searching for heirs, but the
so-called “unforeseen event” of legal birth causes man’s blood to be blotted out and thus legally
unrecognizable by any legitimacy of law. The man’s blood cannot be found, for it is attainted by the
Þction of the state. What do you expect from a bunch of pirates ßying the commercial Arms (ßag)
of war and death? If we accept the ßag, we except its intended jurisdiction, as the Òlaw of the ßag.Ó

Again here I wish to pledge to my fellow man that this work should be considered only as a gift of
knowledge, but perhaps even more so as a swift kick in the ass to wake you the hell up from your
own voluntary enslavement!

As it turns out, most government employees are really just escheat ofÞcers of government,
managing government property that its goyim foolishly believe is their own. Slaves acting as
hirelings, prostituting themselves to their privateering alienators and against their very own kind,
against their own blood and family Ñ the perfection of induced, unqualiÞed patriotism.

ESCHEATOR - An ofÞcer who takes charge of escheated estates FOR THE GOVERNMENT.
(WCA1889)

ESCHEATOR - In English law. The name of an ofÞcer who was APPOINTED IN EVERY
COUNTY to look after the escheats which fell due to the king in that particular county, and
to certify the same into the exchequer. An escheator could continue in ofÞce for one year only,
and was not re-eligible until three years. There does not appear to exist any such ofÞcer at the
present day. (Black4)

CHEATERS, or ESCHEATORS - Were OFFICERS APPOINTED TO LOOK AFTER THE

KING'S ESCHEATS, a duty which gave them great opportunities of FRAUD AND
OPPRESSION, and in consequence many complaints were made of their misconduct. Hence it
seems that a cheater came to signify A FRAUDULENT PERSON, and thence THE VERB TO
CHEAT WAS DERIVED. (Black4)

!1076
 CHEAT - verb transitive - 1. To deceive and defraud in a BARGAIN; to deceive for the
purpose of gain in selling. Its proper application is to COMMERCE, in which A PERSON
USES SOME ARTS, OR MISREPRESENTATIONS, OR WITHHOLDS SOME FACTS, by
which he deceives the PURCHASER. 2. To deceive by any ARTIFICE, trick or device, with a
view TO GAIN AN ADVANTAGE CONTRARY TO COMMON HONESTY; as, to cheat a
person at cards. 3. TO IMPOSE ON; TO TRICK. It is followed by of or out of, and colloquially
by into, as to cheat a child into a belief that a medicine is palatable. - noun - 1. A fraud
committed by deception; a trick; imposition; imposture. 2. A person who cheats; one guilty
of FRAUD BY DECEITFUL PRACTICES. (Webs1828)

CHEAT - verb - To deceive and defraud. It NECESSARILY implies a fraudulent intent. The
words "cheat and defraud" usually mean TO INDUCE A PERSON TO PART WITH THE
POSSESSION OF PROPERTY BY REASON OF INTENTIONALLY FALSE
REPRESENTATIONS RELIED AND ACTED UPON BY SUCH PERSON TO HIS HARM.
They include not only the crime of false pretenses, but also all civil frauds. They include all
tricks, devices, ARTIFICES, or deceptions USED TO DEPRIVE ANOTHER OF PROPERTY
OR OTHER RIGHT. - noun - Swindling; defrauding. "DECEITFUL PRACTICES IN
DEFRAUDING OR ENDEAVORING TO DEFRAUD ANOTHER OF HIS KNOWN RIGHT,
BY SOME WILLFUL DEVICE, CONTRARY TO THE PLAIN RULES OF COMMON
HONESTY.” “THE FRAUDULENT OBTAINING THE PROPERTY OF ANOTHER BY ANY
DECEITFUL AND ILLEGAL PRACTICE OR TOKEN (SHORT OF FELONY) which affects
or may affect the PUBLIC.” Cheats, punishable at COMMON LAW, are such cheats (NOT
AMOUNTING TO FELONY) AS ARE EFFECTED BY DECEITFUL OR ILLEGAL
SYMBOLS OR TOKENS which may affect the public at large, and against which common
prudence could not have guarded. (Black4)

CHEAT - Cheats which are PUNISHABLE AT COMMON LAW may be described to be

DECEITFUL PRACTICES in defrauding or endeavoring to defraud another of his KNOWN
RIGHTS by means of some ARTFUL DEVICE, contrary to the plain rules of common
honesty. MANY ACTS WHICH WOULD BE DENOUNCED AS CHEATS BY THE
PRINCIPLES OF MORALITY ARE NOT LEGALLY CHEATS. TO "CHEAT AND
DEFRAUD" DOES NOT NECESSARILY IMPORT THE COMMISSION OF AN
INDICTABLE OFFENSE. Therefore, in charging a CONSPIRACY to cheat and defraud, the
means proposed must be set out, for the information of the court and of the defendant. A
cheat or fraud, indictable at common law, must be such as would affect the public, such as
common prudence cannot guard against: as, using false weights and measures, or false
tokens, or where there is a conspiracy to cheat. Technically, the offense is "false pretenses.”
Spoken of one in relation to his vocation, the word is defamatory and actionable. See Covin;
Deceit; Pretenses; Swindle. (WCA1889)

—=—

Consider this… does this current system of fraud effect the public? That is to say, does this process
effect the “known rights” of any United States citizen-ship? Of course not. The nature of a citizen-
ship is of the nature of the after-effects of escheat, of pre-tainted, doomed blood. The public has no
legitimate holding of lands in the Þrst place, so how can they be stolen through escheat? When the
birth certiÞcate is created, birthing the legal entity as property of government, no escheat happens
at that time. Only upon the death of the last parent in blood consideration of consanguinity does
this piracy take place, and at that point there is no heir by law or blood to offend or steal from in
the eyes of the common law. Public persons are contracted to a legal system not protected under
common law equity. The contract makes the law. It’s a perfect scheme, for it sidesteps the common
law and causes men to cheat themselves and all their own future generations by the now
customary act of birth certiÞcation and registration.

There were several points during the collection of this research that the author felt as low as one
could feel while being at the same time enlightened by such information. This was one of them. It is
the realization that our culture is so ÒadvancedÓ in its ignorance of itself and its Source that the

!1077
dark ages are taught to us to be the modern era of light. That we live in a system of government
(mind control) revolving around cheating (escheating) is one thing, but to comprehend that the
game they are legally and by state license cheating at is only to block our most powerful ability to
ever win the game (as our spiritual awakening and our attachment to the land in self-governance)
and that the origin of this word cheat comes from stealing land legally under the law of the king by
his own agents, I am still going through my own strange form of cognitive dissonance, which is
manifesting as a deeper sadness than I have ever felt in my Life. But I do not feel defeated, only
incredulous. I simply cannot fathom how this happened, unless I consider that nothing ever really
changed but the words that describe it. It is a battle of the mind, and it was perhaps the organized
propaganda bestowed by false history, public education, and perverted entertainment that changed
good men into bumbling fools always returning to their own vomit. And now you know why
we’re made to be pretended felons at birth, for felons can’t be landholders in their probation
(published personhood).

Of course, the kings escheats still exist in the queens United Kingdom. In British Columbia, Canada
for instance, we Þnd this piracy scheme alive and well:

ESCHEAT ACT
[RSBC 1996] CHAPTER 120

Escheated land may be taken by Attorney General

1. If LAND in British Columbia ESCHEATS to the government because the PERSON

last SEISED or entitled to it DIES INTESTATE and WITHOUT LAWFUL HEIRS, or
forfeits to the government, the Attorney General may take possession of the land in the
NAME of the government.

Delegation by Attorney General

1.1  In this Act, "Attorney General" in a section includes a PERSON designated by the
Attorney General for purposes of the section.

Action for possession

2  The Attorney General may sue to recover possession of escheated land.

Escheat of estates

3 (1) If a person DIES WITHOUT AN HEIR AND INTESTATE in respect of ANY real
estate consisting of ANY estate or interest, whether legal or equitable, in any
incorporeal hereditament, or of any equitable estate or interest in any corporeal
hereditament, whether devised or not devised to trustees by the WILL OF THAT
PERSON, the law of escheat applies in the same manner as if that estate or interest were a
legal estate in corporeal hereditaments.

(2) If any beneÞcial interest in the real estate of any deceased person, whether the estate or
interest of the deceased person in it was LEGAL OR EQUITABLE, is, because of the
failure of the OBJECTS of the DEVISE or other circumstances happening before or
after the death of the deceased person, in whole or in part not effectually DISPOSED
of, the deceased person is deemed, for the purposes of this section, to have DIED
INTESTATE in respect of that part of the beneÞcial interest as is ineffectually disposed
of…

Grant effective although person in adverse possession.


!1078
 6 (1) A grant under section 5 may be made without actual entry or investigation being
Þrst necessary, ALTHOUGH THE LAND IS NOT IN THE ACTUAL POSSESSION OF
THE GOVERNMENT, and even though SOME PERSON CLAIMS TITLE TO IT
ADVERSELY TO A PERSON TO WHOM THE LAND HAD BELONGED.


(2) If possession of the land is withheld, the person to whom the grant is made is then
entitled to sue for the recovery of the land…

Personal property

8  The Attorney General may, as to the Attorney General seems proper,

(a) make any assignment of personal property to which the government is entitled
because of

(i) the person last entitled to it having died intestate and WITHOUT LEAVING
ANY KIN OR OTHER PERSON ENTITLED TO SUCCEED TO IT,

(ii) the property having become vested in the government AS A THING THAT
HAD NO OWNER, or

(iii) the property having become FORFEITED to the government, or

(b) make an assignment of any portion of the personal property, for the purpose of

(i) transferring or restoring it to any person or persons having a LEGAL OR

MORAL claim on the PERSON to whom it had belonged,

(ii) carrying into effect any disposition of it which the person may have
contemplated, or

(iii) REWARDING THE PERSON MAKING DISCOVERY OF THE RIGHT OF

THE GOVERNMENT TO THE PROPERTY…

—=—

But do these escheat laws and the cheaters that impose them exist in the United States? Of course
they do. We call them escheat laws, though we may pretend to use some other term of art to hide
their origin and meaning. For it is the federal and state governments that are the exchequer (agent)
acting on behalf of the several (private) States (principal) in escheat. Only the names have been
changed to protect the innocent pirates.

In a 2011 publication, the attorney Þrm of Briggs and Morgan released the following:

Alert: Minnesota AG and DOC Investigating Compliance With STATE ESCHEAT LAWS
December 14, 2011

The Minnesota Attorney GeneralÕs (AG) ofÞce and Department of Commerce (DOC) have
commenced an investigation to determine whether insurance companies are complying with
state escheat laws. In accordance with state laws, the AG and DOC seek to ensure that life
insurers ARE NOT KEEPING UNCLAIMED DEATH BENEFITS THAT SHOULD BE
PROPERTY OF THE STATE… MinnesotaÕs statutes with respect to unclaimed property are
provided in Minn. Stat. Chapter 345.

The issue of compliance with escheat laws has been raised in other states. Earlier this year,
an investigation in California found that insurance companies were using the Social
Security Death Master File (DMF) to stop making annuity payments as soon as policy

!1079
 holders were deceased, but were not using the same information from the DMF to promptly
pay beneÞciaries of life insurance policies OR TURN OVER UNCLAIMED PROPERTY TO
THE STATE. As many as 38 states, including Minnesota, are now undertaking investigations
to determine whether insurance companies are complying with their respective state laws…

—=—

In all of the states we Þnd similar publications and advertising by attorneys (devilmasters) regarding
the escheat of estates, even as the bar further promotes the mythology that the lands and property
of the common people actually belong to the common people, instead of Truthfully disclosing this
piracy scheme that bestows only the secondary, alienated, imperfect title that under law belongs to
some land baron (lord god) of the blood-line.

This last advertisement even tells us that we need our genealogical chart to establish our blood
inheritance, though most of us are conditioned only to use the birth certiÞcate, which is of course a
voluntary consent to the abandonment and attainder of any legitimacy of those family trees and
our blood-rights. For the birth certiÞcate shows only an infant adulterer that is borne in and thus
only the bastard son of a nation.

ESTATE & PROBATE: Protecting Your Inheritance

By Attorney Albert Gurevich on November 14, 2012

If you do not have a valid Florida WILL or TRUST at the time of your death, THE STATE
OF FLORIDA CAN CLAIM YOUR PROPERTY AFTER YOU PASS AWAY THROUGH
ESCHEAT IF YOU HAVE NO HEIRS OR RELATIVES THAT COME FORWARD TO MAKE
A CLAIM. The court will issue an ORDER whereby your property gets transferred to the
State of Florida. However, if an heir does come forward, the heir can make a claim with the
court…

The claim must be made within three months after the publication of the Notice of
Administration. AN HEIR MUST ESTABLISH THAT THEY ARE RELATED TO THE
DECEDENT THROUGH BIRTH CERTIFICATES, FAMILY TREE OR GENEALOGY
CHARTS. The attorney will review the documentation to make sure that it is sufÞcient for the
court to rule in favor of the claimant and recognize the claimant as THE RIGHTFUL HEIR
OF THE DECEDENT. THE COURT WILL ISSUE AN ORDER APPROVING THE
DECEDENTÕS HEIR so that the assets can be distributed to the heir after all the claims have
been paid and the estate can be closed…

—=—

LetÕs clear up the above statement by replacing the word ÒStateÓ with the word ÒPeople.Ó The
People that is Florida can claim your personÕs property, which again means, as a common US
citizenship, YOU ARENÕT THE PEOPLE! One only needs a will or trust if one hasn’t retained any
blood heirs in consideration of law. Fictional persons have no will of their own, and so a will must
be created for them by their agents. For the law only protects the negative liberties of private men,
not the positive rights of enslaved citizenships. A slave has no right of inheritance, but has the right
to request of the government that it allow the Þctional titles to land and property (proof of debt) to
be passed on to their abandoned children in taxation instead of merely taken by force. If you need a
will or trust, you are not free, you are not legitimate, you are not in equitable status under the
Natural Law, and you are only the user of your children and your property, says manÕs legal law.

We can Þnd escheat (cheat) laws in US Code and as considered in SEC regulations as well. In this
code, we get a healthy dose of very bad tasting medicine. For we see here that the United States is
only created to protect the States (the sovereign People) from us and not we, the citizenships of the
United States from those States. Remember, the creator controls.

!1080
US Code › Title 26 › Subtitle F › Chapter 65 › Subchapter A › § 6408

No overpayment of any tax imposed by this title shall be refunded (and no interest with
respect to any such overpayment shall be paid) if the amount of such refund (or interest)
would escheat to a State or would otherwise become the property of a State under any law
relating to the disposition of unclaimed or abandoned property. No refund (or payment of
interest) shall be made to the estate OF ANY DECEDENT unless it is afÞrmatively shown
THAT SUCH AMOUNT WILL NOT ESCHEAT TO A STATE OR OTHERWISE BECOME
THE PROPERTY OF A STATE UNDER SUCH A LAW.

US Code › Title 12 › Chapter 26 › § 2503

Where any sum is payable on a money order, traveler’s check, or other similar written
instrument (other than a third party bank check) on which a banking or Þnancial organization
or a business association is directly liable:

(1) if the books and records of such banking or Þnancial organization or business
association show the State in which such money order, traveler’s check, or similar written
instrument was purchased, THAT STATE SHALL BE ENTITLED EXCLUSIVELY TO
ESCHEAT or take custody of the sum payable on such instrument, to the extent of that
State’s power UNDER ITS OWN LAWS TO ESCHEAT OR TAKE CUSTODY of such
sum;


(2) if the books and records of such banking or Þnancial organization or business
association do not show the State in which such money order, traveler’s check, or similar
written instrument was purchased, the State in which the banking or Þnancial
organization or business association has its PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS shall be
ENTITLED TO ESCHEAT OR TAKE CUSTODY of the sum payable on such money
order, traveler’s check, or similar written instrument, to the extent of that State’s power
UNDER ITS OWN LAWS TO ESCHEAT or take custody of such sum, until another
State shall demonstrate by written evidence THAT IT IS THE STATE OF PURCHASE;
or

(3) if the books and records of such banking or Þnancial organizations or business
association show the State in which such money order, traveler’s check, or similar written
instrument was purchased and the laws of the State of purchase do not provide for the
escheat or custodial taking of the sum payable on such instrument, the State in which
the banking or Þnancial organization or business association has its PRINCIPAL
PLACE OF BUSINESS shall be ENTITLED TO ESCHEAT or take custody of the sum
payable on such money order, traveler’s check, or similar written instrument, to the extent
of that State’s power under its own laws to escheat or take custody of such sum, subject
to the right of the State of purchase to recover such sum from the STATE OF
PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS if and when the law of the STATE OF PURCHASE
makes provision for ESCHEAT OR CUSTODIAL TAKING of such sum.

—US Code. Excerpted from ‘Legal Information Institute’ online, Cornell University Law School

—=—

Accounts – Abandoned or Unclaimed:

THE ESCHEATMENT PROCESS

All states require Þnancial institutions, including brokerage Þrms, to report when personal
property has been abandoned or unclaimed after a period of time speciÞed by state law —
often Þve years. Before a brokerage account can be considered abandoned or unclaimed, the
Þrm must make a diligent effort to try to locate the account owner. If the Þrm is unable to do

!1081
 so, and the account has remained inactive for the period of time speciÞed by state law, the Þrm
must report the account to the state where the account is held. THE STATE THEN CLAIMS
THE ACCOUNT THROUGH A PROCESS CALLED "ESCHEATMENT," WHEREBY THE
STATE BECOMES THE OWNER of the account.

As part of the escheatment process, the state will hold the account as a bookkeeping entry,
against which the former account owner may make a claim. STATES TEND TO SELL THE
SECURITIES IN ESCHEATED ACCOUNTS AND TREAT THE PROCEEDS AS STATE
FUNDS. When a former account owner makes a valid request, however, the states will
normally provide the former owner with CASH EQUALING THE VALUE OF THE
ACCOUNT at the time of escheatment. This amount of cash does not include any dividends
or interest covering the time after escheatment.

There are several websites, including commercial ones, where you can search for unclaimed
property. One non-commercial site, the National Association of Unclaimed Property
Administrators, allows you to search by individual state.

States have their own requirements for FINDING and claiming unclaimed property. If you
believe you have unclaimed property, the state will require you to send them
INFORMATION about YOURSELF to verify your ownership of the unclaimed property.
After verifying your OWNERSHIP, the state will either mail you a claim form or PERMIT
you to Þll out the form online and print it for SUBMISSION TO THE STATE.

—Securities And Exchange Commission website, excerpted from: (http://www.sec.gov/answers/escheat.htm) as ofÞcial .gov reference

—=—

So what is the difference between the English system of escheat under the Crown and this United
States system of commercial escheat laws? In England, this is tradition. It has always been a feudal
tenure, its citizens always subject-slaves of that crown. But in America these are not standing laws.
They are of the nature of a voluntary, contractual dis-ease. They are steeped in trickery and deceit,
born of voluntary ignorance and false pride, and controlled by attorneys pretending to be
legitimate lawmakers.

If your parents made an accidental overpayment on any taxes while they were physically alive and
also living in the spiritually dead legal form of a public status called ÒtaxpayerÓ before that
strawman's civil death was caused by their Natural death, the federal (confederate/conspiratorial)
law is set up to ensure that the issues (children) of that straw will be cheated out of any refund or
recompense because its only function protects and preserves property of the States (People). The
property was always held of the private State through tenancy and rent. And so the State
(legitimate bloodline of People in posterity) has Þrst rights to the estate before those little
adulterous bastards with tainted blood, the children being not of the bloodline of the State (People)
and therefore not actual holders of the landed estates of their ancestry or of their so-called
Òproperty.Ó And so each of the 50 pirate ships (several States) that make up the compact and
created the pirate cove government called the ÒUnited StatesÓ are guaranteed their share of that
pirate booty (estate and property of their own public persons) when it is found within any of their
bordered territory of seizure (district). It is treasure found through word magic and trickery by
cheaters (escheaters).

PELFE, or PELFRE - Booty; also THE PERSONAL EFFECTS OF A FELON CONVICT.

(Black4)

BOOTY - PROPERTY CAPTURED FROM THE ENEMY IN WAR, ON LAND. U. S. v. Bales

of Cotton, 28 Fed. Cas. 302. (Black4)

—=—

!1082
Notice the case referenced is the United States vs. Bales of Cotton. Just how exactly does “Bales of
Cotton” represent itself as a person? It does not. Pirate booty simply has no defense for itself. And
as felons birthed into the United States, what is in our possession as “property” is by its very nature
booty (pelfe) for the taking. It can be legally “taken” at any time, for we are merely a conquered
(purchased) people voluntarily acting and accumulating all things in the commercial vessel
(property) of these pirates. And booty is merely a form of exaction (the taking of what is not one’s
due), which is of course the “equal right” of all US citizenships to be exacted (Title 42, Section 1981).
Peace is indeed war. Just ask anyone who’s been convicted and sent to prison. Of course, booty is
just another word for what is legal “personal property” or property of the US person collected during
the highly unlawful but legally permitted (licensed) asset forfeiture raids that all but fund some
municipal police departments (organized criminal street gangs) around the nation. As felons by
birth, it is very difÞcult to retrieve back what was Òpersonal property,Ó for it was never considered
to be of the Þrst person. It is never actually our own. Everything on the monopoly board is
anotherÕs property by name and title. Everything!

Are these escheat laws in America the same as the old feudal escheat? Sure thing… Only the
appearance of the “king” has changed, which in America is now a sovereign People acting in a
body politic through a collective, conspiratorial, incorporated king-ship. It’s just the master
cheaters through the ofÞce of head attorney as legal executive and ÒGeneralÓ re-distributing State
owned property to the dead hands of its ship-masters, as agents to their principal. For all the work
an employee (agent) does in his life’s work at any corporation, no product of that work is his own,
for the agent works only to build the estate and holdings of the principal (corporation). This feudal
state of being, called as making a living, is no way to Live.

ESCHEAT -  In feudal English land law, the return or forfeiture TO THE LORD OF LAND
HELD BY HIS TENANT. There were generally two conditions by which land would escheat:
THE DEATH OF THE TENANT WITHOUT HEIRS OR THE CONVICTION OF THE
TENANT FOR A FELONY. In case of FELONY, THE LAND WOULD LOSE ITS
INHERITABILITY AND ESCHEAT TO THE LORD, who would then hold the land subject
to the crown’s right TO EXPLOIT THE FELON’S LANDS for a year and a day. In time, this
exploitation right of the crown was commuted in return for a money payment OR SERVICE
RENDERED to the crown by the lord. In the case of a tenant convicted of high treason,
however, his land escheated directly to the crown, and the lord forfeited all rights he had in
that tenant’s lands completely. The escheat of lands for felony was abolished by statute in
England in 1870; and by a statute enacted in 1925, no longer does land escheat to its former
owner solely for failure of heirs. In the United States, laws passed in all states provide
THAT LAND WILL ESCHEAT TO THE STATE (COUNTY OR CITY) IF AN OWNER DIES
WITHOUT A VALID WILL AND IF NO HEIRS CAN BE FOUND. See also ATTAINDER.
(Encyclopedia Britannica online)

ATTAINDER, BILL OF ATTAINDER -  In English law, the extinction of civil and political
rights resulting from a sentence of death or outlawry AFTER A CONVICTION OF
TREASON OR A FELONY. The most important consequences of attainder were forfeiture
and CORRUPTION OF BLOOD. For treason, an offender’s lands were forfeited to the king.
For felonies, lands were forfeited to the king for a year and a day and then, because felonies
were considered A BREACH OF THE FEUDAL BOND, escheated (forfeited) to the lord
from whom the offender held his tenure. Subsequently, in Magna Carta (1215), the crown
renounced its claim to forfeiture in the case of felony. Even harsher than attainder was the
doctrine of corruption of blood, by which THE PERSON ATTAINTED WAS
DISQUALIFIED FROM INHERITING OR TRANSMITTING PROPERTY AND HIS
DESCENDANTS were forever barred from any inheritance of his rights to title. All forms
of attainder—except the forfeiture that followed indictment for treason—were abolished
during the 19th century. As a result of the English experience, the framers of the Constitution
of the United States provided (Article III, Section 3) that “the Congress shall have Power to
declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of
Blood, or Forfeiture EXCEPT DURING THE LIFE OF THE PERSON ATTAINTED.”

!1083
 Historically, a legislative act attainting a person without a judicial trial was known as a bill of
attainder or—if punishment was less than death—as a bill of pains and penalties… Acts of
attainder or of pains and penalties were passed by some of the American colonial
legislatures until the Constitution forbade them. In applying these prohibitions, THE
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS EXPANDED THE HISTORICAL
CONCEPTION OF ATTAINDER… (Encyclopedia Britannica online)

—=—

Now correct me if I’m wrong here, but if I state in my constitution (contract) that “…no Attainder
of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture EXCEPT DURING THE LIFE OF THE
PERSON ATTAINTED,” did I not just state that attainder and treason shall work corruption of
blood during the life of the person? And does that not merely mean that attainder is Þne and dandy
as long as the person is alive? And does that not mean that all these pirates have to do to keep their
greedy little hands on everyone else's lands and property is to ensure through the birth process that
every child is registered under Caesar and so found and seized in a modern pseudo-feudal state?
Again I’d hate to be wrong here, but doesn’t that mean that attainder can only be worked on a
person from the beginning of his Þctional birth to the end of that strawman's civil life, since there is
no actual man implied in Þctional personhood but as surety for its legal performance? Is not the
registration of property (of the children of God) into Þctional persons not oneÕs own, into persons
that belong to the state, the same thing as an attainder of blood, as the killing of the heirs? Isn’t that
the opposite of protection, or can we now see that the constitution only protects the pirates and
their own bloodline? Does no one question this? Really? Because it turns out that the constitution is
absolutely full of these circular statements and exception clauses that only beneÞt the private People
in their own reserved rights.

The 13th amendment literally allows legalized, voluntary slavery as long as it “is a punishment for
crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,” while making it sound like quite the
opposite to the casual reader, as if all slavery were abolished. Once children are enslaved and
conÞrmed, the 5th amendment literally states that our Òlife, liberty, and propertyÓ is safe and canÕt
be taken UNLESS the government convicts us of a crime, as in THE CRIME OF BIRTH AS A
FELONY. Seriously, go read it, right now. It says voluntary slavery and voluntary servitude are
perfectly LEGAL as long as (EXCEPT IF) the person is a convicted criminal, and that our life,
liberty, and property, CAN be taken with “due process of law.” As registered agents for service of
process, what idiot can possibly think they are not a victim of that law of the land, otherwise
known as “due process of law?” Go ahead, go and read it. This can wait…

So the question that one still in the delusion of patriotic constitutionalism might ask here would be,
is that constitutional? Is slavery, seizure of life, liberty, and property, and attainder by felony at all
constitutional?

Sigh… It’s all written in there, is it not?

Get this straight. Everything is, or at least can be declared in the courts as “constitutional,” whether
it is in or out of the constitution… but only if you are a slave. It’s simply not your call or opinion to
make. That covenant only restricts a very few things, and most of those things have exception
clauses like those we just saw, which literally state that it is constitutional to cheat from you your
contracted legal life, liberty, and property, including your legalized children. These are not things of
Nature. These are constituted things, pretending they’re not merely the paper that represents those
things of Reality. A political right only effects political things, and all things political are only ever
artiÞcial. The constitution is only the creation of lies and protects only its own created lies. They are
only called politically as Òtruths,Ó and a lie is a legal ÒtruthÓ when it is conÞrmed and ratiÞed by a
liar. This is the domain of the devilmasters.

Those who act privately and reserve all of their rights in sovereignty need not worry. But those
created 14th amendment citizenships of the United States cannot claim that anything is
unconstitutional, for they are not a party to it. Just like an earthling cannot claim something is un-

!1084
Martian-utional while residing on earth, a public person cannot complain privately about public
law. These are two different worlds (realms). One is of the right of blood, one is of the
constitutionally permitted cheat of those contractually bound in the attainder of blood of
commercial personhood in that pirate cove (district). The bloodless are the constitution-less. We are
not that private People in any constituted compact. We are not above the constitution and so we
cannot compare the law that governs us to that constitution, which only negatively protects the
unalienable rights of those privately in compact to it. We are foreigners, aliens in each state. We
have no unalienable rights and so nothing done to us can ever be compared to the constitutional
protections of those who have negatively reserved their unalienable rights. And so everything that
the principality of government, which was initially created by the constitution, does to its own
creations as its agents is perfectly constitutional. To declare what is constitutional is certainly not a
right of public persons. Nor is any spiritual set of True, Natural Life, Liberty, and Property the right
of public persons (property). Property (slaves) generally have no rights. The life is Þctional, the
liberty is only in an open-air prison for aliens/foreigners in commerce under mammon, and the
property is only ever that of a stranger’s paper title. Without holding the Real thing, no man’s
person has any right to, in Reality, actually effect it. A papered man deals only in paper things. A
strawman can’t Really be harmed, now can it?

We see in the British Columbia Escheat Act above that the pirates even offer rewards for the
common goy to rat each other’s unclaimed estates out to government, and so many of us slaves
have been made into cheats as well, transformed into agents of the legal matrix. The con game is
world wide. It’s called “the law.” And it all relies on each of us being born into a felony bastard-
ship, so that any trace of blood is tainted and the blood-right of heirship forfeited in escheat. We
have slowly been dragged, by every new legal registration of birth and incorporation of lands, back
into the feudal system by our own ignorance of language. We have fallen under the magic spellings
of these devil’s contracts.

AN - The English indeÞnite article. Equivalent to Òone” or “any;” seldom used to denote
plurality. (Black4)

AN ET JOUR - French. Year and day; a year and a day. (Black4)

AN, JOUR, ET WASTE - In feudal law, year, day, and waste. A FORFEITURE OF THE
LANDS TO THE CROWN INCURRED BY THE FELONY OF THE TENANT, after which
time the land ESCHEATS TO THE LORD. Termes de la Ley. See Year, Day, and Waste. (Black4)

YEAR, DAY, AND WASTE - In English law. An ancient prerogative of the king, whereby he
was entitled to the proÞts, for a year and a day, of the lands OF PERSONS ATTAINTED OF
PETTY TREASON OR FELONY, together with the right of WASTING the tenements,
afterwards RESTORING THE PROPERTY TO THE LORD OF THE FEE. See An, jour, et
waste. (Black4)

YEAR AND DAY - This period was Þxed for many purposes in law. Thus, in the case of an
estray, if the owner did not claim it within that time, IT BECAME THE PROPERTY OF THE
LORD. So the owners of wreck must claim it within a year and a day. Death must follow upon
wounding within a year and a day if the wounding is to be indicted as murder. Also, a year
and a day were given for prosecuting or avoiding certain legal acts; e. g., for bringing actions
after entry, for making claim for avoiding a Þne, etc. (Black4)

WASTE - Deterioration; destruction. 1. ANY SQUANDERING OR MISAPPLICATION OF

PROPERTY or of a fund by trustees or others charged with a duty, or any ABUSE OF
TRUST OR OF DUTY BY WHICH PROPERTY IS LOST or an estate or trust fund is
diminished in value. If an executor or administrator be extravagant, it is a species of
"devastation or waste" of the substance of the deceased. A spoil or destruction in houses,
gardens, trees, or other corporeal hereditament, to the disherison of him that has the
remainder or reversion in fee-simple or fee-tail. WHATEVER DOES A LASTING DAMAGE

!1085
 TO THE FREEHOLD OR INHERITANCE. A spoil and destruction of the estate, in houses,
woods, or lands, by demolishing not the temporary proÞts only BUT THE VERY
SUBSTANCE OF THE THING, THEREBY RENDERING IT WILD AND DESOLATE,
which the common law expresses by the word vastum. Spoliation or destruction to lands or
other corporeal heireditaments by a tenant to the prejudice of the reversioner or remainder-
man. Any unlawful act or omission of duty on things forming an essential part of it, done or
suffered by a person rightfully in possession as tenant, or having but A PARTIAL ESTATE,
LIKE THAT OF A MORTGAGOR. (WCA1889)

—=—

This term of year and day is the ancient equivalent of the artiÞcial life of the natural person. At the
end of that term of life the land reverts back to the state, and is thus reassigned to the next person in
trust. But the blood is absent in this consideration. The property never leaves the hands of the land-
lords, only being transferred on paper to the next tenant in rent.

As we further delve into these old words, we Þnd a surprising twist. For public property is more
likened to a disease (debt) than a cure.

CADUCA - In the civil law. Property of an INHERITABLE QUALITY; property such as

DESCENDS TO AN HEIR. Also the LAPSE OF A TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITION OR
LEGACY. Also AN ESCHEAT; ESCHEATED PROPERTY. (Black4)

CADUCARY - Relating to or of the nature of ESCHEAT, FORFEITURE, OR

CONFISCATION. (Black4)

CADUCITY - noun - Tendency TO FALL. (Webs1828)

CADUCOUS - adjective - In botany, falling early; as caducous leaves, which fall before the end
of summer. A caducous calyx falls before the corol is well unfolded. (Webs1828)

CADUCEUS - noun - In antiquity, Mercury’s rod; a wand entwisted by two serpents, borne
(carried) by Mercury as AN ENSIGN OF QUALITY AND OFFICE. On medals, the caduceus
is a symbol of good conduct, peace and prosperity. The rod represents POWER; the
serpents, WISDOM; and the two wings, DILIGENCE AND ACTIVITY. (Webs1828)

—=—

How’s that for a segue?

Don’t you wonder why the caduceus is the symbol of pharmacology (licensed witchcraft and
poisoning), as the artful practice of modern, legalized “medicine,” even as professed “doctors”
cause disease, poison, irradiate, and chemically lobotomize this entire cancer and disease-ridden
generation? For what is Ògood conductÓ by a demon but the harming of others? What is Òpeace and
prosperity” to a psychopath and eugenicist who’s agents (useful innocents) are given the charge by
these agencies of government of vaccinating the entire public for the purposes of population
control and spread of proÞtable dis-ease? Perspective is everything. What is good to them is not
necessarily good for us, and rarely is this not the case.

And just what is this Roman god who bears the caduceus?

In the ‘Glossary to Ovid's FastiÔ by Boyle and Woodard and from ÔThe Religion of the Romans’ by
Rupke, Mercury is described as “the patron god of FINANCIAL GAIN, COMMERCE, eloquence
(and thus poetry), MESSAGES/COMMUNICATION (including DIVINATION), TRAVELERS,
BOUNDARIES, LUCK, TRICKERY AND THIEVES; he is also THE GUIDE OF SOULS TO THE
UNDERWORLD…” (excerpt from Wikipedia.com entry for ‘Mercury’)

!1086
Now why in God’s name would that be the symbol for the institutions of modern medicine, unless
the creators of this modern medical institution prescribe to quite a different god than their patients?
Isn’t it obvious? They are commercial agencies and professors working as licensed agents of
government for their own Þnancial gain, ensuring the communication and certiÞcation of vital
statistics for every child, which metaphorically makes every child corrupted in felony and thus
necessarily registered into the debtor’s hell of mammon run by these tricksters and thieves, who
divine themselves as the gods of Romanized things. Nothing has changed except the perception
and dress of these crafts, ceremonial robes replaced by white coats and licenses. What could be
more Þtting than this symbol of the pagan gods of commerce? There is no possible excuse for the
use of this symbology except the Truth.

Of course those doctors working in the employment of these institutions are generally speaking
only useful idiots (useful innocents), many only following in their father’s or family’s profession,
and most only publicly educated and vested so that they would never question just why the
inscribed presence of the symbol of a Roman god adorns the letterhead of every prescription they
write and of every label attached to every drug they induce the use of by their patients (those who
suffer evil beneath them; those who fall by caducity). We are Truly a class of people cheated out of
the well-being of our Life, Liberty, and Property, and its all “constitutional!”

Notice that in the deÞnition of ÒcheatÓ above that any protections of the common law or other
systems of law do not apply to escheats relating to felony. In other words, this legal theft as piracy
on the high seas of commerce can only be excusable by licensure of law if the supposed seizure is
only induced upon one that is a felon (without rights) standing only in public capacity. And so full
circle here we can understand why this whole shell game was created regarding birth and
abandonment through certiÞcation and registration of bastard children born of illegitimate but
“legal” marriages that cause attainder (corruption of blood) and thus generate no legitimated heirs
capable of inheriting land. It is the only way to get around the Natural Law of God, by cheating.
And a municipal citizenship to the United States creates such a contractual relationship that allows
each sovereign State’s (King’s) escheaters to legally cheat us all out of our inheritable land and
property. This has been made customary, ritualistic, and even a religious behavior. For though we
are born in the geographical area known as one of the states (governments) of the union, we pledge
our allegiance to a foreign power, which just happens to be the holding corporation in municipal
form that the State’s created so as to bar its denizened members from acquiring their inheritances.
And so the treasonous felony of being born in the United States is conÞrmed and ratiÞed by the
information provided by our maternal parent (usually the mother) acting as “informer” of the
felonious act of adulterous bastardy, and the felon (child of the district) is tainted from his rights
through the cheat of the pirates of each State (People) and their agentic central government.

Again, as John Locke stated without any perfect clarity of his own status and pirate tendencies at
the time, the purpose of the central government is to preserve and protect the property of the States
(They, the sovereign People) who created it from the common goyim (common people of the
nation) it was stolen from, and to ensure the transfer of wealth (land) from these common felons,
plebes, and foreigners into their several (private) hands through the laws of escheat. Government is
constituted, in other words, to protect the cheaters. Born felons need not apply, for how can I hold
the lands with a private State if I left that State (People) to have domicile in a foreign nation (state)?
He who departs to become a civilly dead person of the United States jurisdiction in district will
certainly be giving up all of the inheritances of his blood and People (State). He is no longer acting
as one of the People, but merely as a subject under them.

FELON - noun - [Low Latin felo.] 1. In law, a person who has committed felony. [See Felony.]
2. A whitlow; a painful swelling formed in the periosteum at the end of the Þnger. - adjective -
1. Malignant; Þerce; malicious; PROCEEDING FROM A DEPRAVED HEART. Vain shows of
love to vail his felon hate. 2. Traitorous; disloyal. (Webs1828)

FELONY - noun - [See Felon.] In common law, ANY CRIME WHICH INCURS THE
FORFEITURE OF LANDS OR GOODS. Treason was formerly comprised under the name of
felony but is now distinguished from crimes thus denominated, although it is really a felony.

!1087
All offenses punishable with DEATH are felonies; and so are some crimes not thus
punished, as suicide, homicide by chance-medley, or in self-defense, and petty larceny. Capital
punishment therefore does not necessarily enter into the true idea or deÞnition of felony;
THE TRUE CRITERION OF FELONY BEING FORFEITURE OF LANDS OR GOODS. But
the idea of felony has been so generally connected with that of capital punishment, that law
and usage now CONFIRM THAT CONNECTION. Thus if a statute makes any new offense
a felony it is understood to mean a crime punishable with DEATH. (Webs1828)

DEATH - … 2. The STATE of the dead; as the gates of death. Job 38:17… 9. In theology,
perpetual separation from God, and eternal torments; called the second death. Revelation
2:10. 10. Separation or alienation OF THE SOUL from God; A BEING UNDER THE
DOMINION OF SIN, and destitute of grace or divine life; CALLED SPIRITUAL DEATH.
We know that we have PASSED FROM DEATH TO LIFE, because we love the brethren. 1
John 3:1. Luke I. CIVIL DEATH IS THE SEPARATION OF A MAN FROM CIVIL SOCIETY,
OR FROM THE ENJOYMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS; as by banishment, abjuration of the
realm, entering into a monastery, etc. (Webs1828)

DEAD USE - A future use. (Black4)

DEAD PLEDGE - A mortgage, mortuum vadium. (Black4)

DEAD-BORN - A dead-born child is to be considered as if it had never been conceived or

born; in other words, it is presumed it never had life, it being a maxim of the common law
that mortuus exitus non est exitus (a dead birth is no birth). This is also the doctrine of the civil
law. (Black4)

DEATH - The cessation of life; THE CEASING TO EXIST; deÞned by physicians as a total
stoppage of the circulation of the BLOOD, and a cessation of the animal and vital functions
consequent thereon, such as respiration, pulsation, etc. This is "natural death," IN
CONTRADISTINCTION TO "CIVIL DEATH," and, also, to "violent death," See those titles,
infra. (Black4)

DEATH - Cessation of life; EXTINCTION OF POLITICAL EXISTENCE. See Life. (WCA1889)



CIVIL DEATH - The state of a PERSON who, THOUGH POSSESSING NATURAL LIFE,
HAS LOST ALL HIS CIVIL RIGHTS, AND AS TO THEM, IS CONSIDERED AS DEAD. At
common law, the EXTINCTION of civil rights AND RELATIONS, so that the property of a
person declared civilly dead PASSES TO HIS HEIRS AS IF DEAD IN FACT. The "civil
death" spoken of in the books, is of two kinds: (1) Where there is A TOTAL EXTINCTION OF
THE CIVIL RIGHTS AND RELATIONS OF THE PARTY, SO THAT HE CAN NEITHER
TAKE NOR HOLD PROPERTY, and his heirs succeed to his estate in the same manner as if
he were really dead, OR THE ESTATE IS FORFEITED TO THE CROWN. (2) WHERE
THERE IS AN INCAPACITY TO HOLD PROPERTY, or to sue in the king's courts,
ATTENDED WITH FORFEITURE OF THE ESTATE to the crown. Of the Þrst kind, are the
cases of monks professed, and ABJURATION OF THE REALM: all the other cases are of the
second kind. Strictly speaking, there but two cases of civil death; those of a monk professed,
and an abjuration of the realm. In New York a person sentenced to imprisonment is
thereafter deemed civilly dead under Penal Law Sub-Section 511. (Black4)

CIVIL DEATH - Extinction of civil rights. A bankrupt is regarded as civilly dead; so is an

insolvent corporation, to the extent that ITS PROPERTY MAY BE ADMINISTERED AS A
TRUST FUND FOR CREDITORS AND STOCKHOLDERS. Formerly, if a man was
banished or abjured the realm, or entered a monastery, before the law he was civilly dead—
civilitur mortuus. Then, a monk, like a dying man, could make a will, or leave his next of kin
to administer AS IF HE HAD DIED INTESTATE. Since, also, the act determined A LEASE
FOR LIFE, conveyances for life were usually made for the term of one's “natural life.” A
convict, in the penitentiary, is civilly dead, and cannot be sued. (WCA1889)

!1088
 NATURAL DEATH - A death which occurs by the unassisted operation of natural causes, as
distinguished not only from "civil death," but also from “violent death.” (Black4)

NATURAL DEATH - Death from the unassisted operation of natural causes; DEATH BY
VISITATION OF THE CREATOR. (WCA1889)

PRESUMPTIVE DEATH - That which is PRESUMED FROM PROOF of a LONG

CONTINUED ABSENCE unheard from and unexplained. The general rule, as now
understood, is that the presumption of the duration of life ceases at the expiration of seven
years from the time when the person was last known to be living; and after the lapse of that
period there is a presumption of death. (Black4)

DEATH DUTY - A charge or toll WHICH THE STATE MAKES UPON THE RIGHT TO
TRANSMIT OR TO RECEIVE PROPERTY ON THE DEATH OF THE OWNER. The usual
name in England for AN INHERITANCE TAX. (Black4)

VIOLENT DEATH - One caused or accelerated by the interference of HUMAN AGENCY; -

distinguished from "natural death.” (Black4)

—=—

In Nature, a man is said to be independent of government unless he accepts a legal status and
additional legal surname. And so here we can dissect the difference between common and legal
meanings of words. Let’s take independence for example. If a man has Natural independence, he
holds a Natural state of Being (verb) Free from government, contract, bond, etc., except to that Law
in obedience of NatureÕs God. But this is not the same as a legally deÞned state of artiÞcial in-
dependence placed on citizenships(servants/slaves) of government. A citizen-ship is in a state of
legal in-dependence. As this word in means a state of being seized, this alters the legal meaning to
say that a citizen is a seized dependent (in-dependent). All his rights come from government and are
bestowed upon only the Þctional ÒnaturalÓ person that man possesses and uses in commerce. Thus
his rights are solely dependent upon that person (status) with no rights speciÞcally and privately
reserved from that legal government. Thus the man is in a state of dependence through his straw-
man. He is in political dependence to government by his citizen-ship.

US citizenship is only the simulation of independence, a franchise of birth in nativity.

It is perhaps the greatest fallacy of the citizenry of the United States in their patriotic fervor that this
voluntary state of servitude called “citizenship” actually creates a state of betterment and of higher
right and status. Quite the opposite is the case.

And so let us be clear, citizenship is a punishment that carries with it an induction into the penal
colony we call the United States jurisdiction. We are all penal prisoners of an open-air debtor’s
prison (jurisdiction), accountable only for our innocent involvement in the penal crime of our
adulterous parents; felons held in answer merely for the crime of our birth. Though attainder is
unconstitutional to the private bloodline, the contractual relationship implied by birth and
conÞrmation show the intent of the public citizenship is not to reserve any right in any private
capacity. The constitution cannot protect fools nor those that treat their own religious status as
anything but the Highest Law.

PENAL - Punishable; inßicting a punishment; containing a penalty, or relating to a penalty.

(Black4)

PENAL ACTION - In practice. An action upon a penal statute; an action for the recovery of a
penalty given by statute. An action which enforces a FORFEITURE or penalty FOR
TRANSGRESSING THE LAW. The term "penal" is broader than "criminal," and relates to
actions which are not necessarily criminal as well. The term "penalty" in its broad sense is a
generic term which includes Þnes as well as other kinds of punishment, but in its narrowest

!1089
 sense is the amount recovered for violation of the statute law of the state or a municipal
ordinance, which violation may or may not be a crime, and the term applies mostly to a
pecuniary punishment. The word "forfeiture" is frequently used in civil as well as criminal
law, and it is also used in actions for a penalty, although the action is a civil one.
Distinguished from a popular or qui tam action, in which the action is brought by THE
INFORMER, to whom part of the penalty goes. A penal action or information is brought by
an ofÞcer, and the penalty goes to the king. But in American law, THE TERM INCLUDES
ACTIONS BROUGHT BY INFORMERS OR OTHER PRIVATE PERSONS, as well as those
INSTITUTED BY GOVERNMENTS OR PUBLIC OFFICERS. In a broad sense, the term has
been made to include all actions in which there may be a recovery of exemplary or vindictive
damages, as suits for libel and slander, or in which special, double, or triple damages are given
by statute, such as actions to recover money paid as usury or lost in gaming. But in a more
particular sense it means (1) an action on a statute which gives a certain penalty TO BE
RECOVERED BY ANY PERSON WHO WILL SUE FOR IT; or (2) an action in which the
judgment against the defendant is in the nature of a Þne or is intended as a punishment,
actions in which the recovery is to be compensatory in its purpose and effect not being penal
actions but civil suits, though they may carry special damages by statute. (Black4)

PENAL BILL - An instrument formerly in use, BY WHICH A PARTY BOUND HIMSELF to

pay a certain sum or sums of money, OR TO DO CERTAIN ACTS, or, in default thereof, to
pay a certain speciÞed sum by way of penalty; thence termed a "penal sum." These
instruments have been SUPERSEDED BY THE USE OF A BOND in a penal sum, with
conditions. (Black4)

PENAL BOND - A promise to pay a named sum of money, the penalty, with a condition
underwritten that, IF A STIPULATED COLLATERAL THING, OTHER THAN THE
PAYMENT OF MONEY, BE DONE OR FORBORNE, THE OBLIGATION SHALL BE VOID.
(Black4)

—=—

The sum of our penal payment, our Þne and fee of penalty, is to be separated from the land and
from our God (Source), made only to follow the law of our commercial gods (Þction) and to
wander hopelessly upon lands that can never be our own. Our performance debt as a bond of
surety is a penal one, expressing our felony of birth and professing us as criminals by our parental
informers.

We must remember to consider this all from the mind of the psychopath, from the imagination of
the mind of a self-proclaimed god (sovereign). This crime of being born is similar in its criminality
to that of the modern commercial scam of carbon credits. Our birth represents an imaginary burden
upon the state and to the thugs upon the lands, those land-lords whose governments control the
resources of the state. We are taxed for this burden that causes the state so much pretended pain,
and like the tithing to a church, we are allowed to exist in this penal state of citizenship only to pay
for the sin of our accident of birth.

Remember that the legal word taint in law means “A conviction of FELONY, or the person so
convicted” and that to attaint is “to corrupt,” and that attainder is “CORRUPTION OF BLOOD
DUE TO FELONY.”

Man becomes a disposable commodity (slave) of government through his voluntary bond and
subjection to a person-hood in surety. The person is in a state of citizenship, not the man. Man only
agrees to conduct himself as a servant, utilizing the public persona (ship) provided by government
in the contractual commercial capacity of his master. Government becomes his creator and thus
rules his state of Þctional being while in legal persona despite any Natural Law. A person is not
Natural, though often called as a false Ònatural.Ó A man acting in person is exempt and removed
from the Natural Law in legal consideration of his actions and rights. His ÒGod-given rightsÓ are

!1090
sold and stripped away in alienation, replaced by legal beneÞts and obligations attached to the
strawman person under a contractual relationship of which he is surety for. The contracted dis-
ease. Government disposes upon man a Þctional (legal) state of artiÞcial being called a Òperson,Ó
which it uses to alienate and thus control the Living manÕs actions within a disposition of formality.
Man takes upon himself a mark, as the imaginary form (Þction) of evil. The Living substance of
man takes on the dead form of incorporation. But in order to take upon manÕs soul the legal artiÞce
of manÕs Þctional persona, he must change his disposition by giving up on, deposing, alienating,
abdicating, and abandoning his True God and Nature (Source).

The more simple description of this process is merely that a man is born private until he enters into
a legal status of citizenship (personhood), which is purely public. Privacy is abandoned for the
public (governmentÕs) commercial good. All the manÕs possessions, property, liberties, etc., become
public (government property). Man in public persona only has the rights of use of public things,
but holds nothing privately. The public person is a bankrupt, but a private citizen would never
declare himself as such. He voluntarily abandons his private Nature (as a Being of God) and enters
into a public persona (legal entity of government).

LetÕs dissect these terms to discover their individual DNA roots within the art of legal word-magic:

DISPOSITION - noun - [Latin] 1. The act of disposing, or state of being disposed. 2. Manner
in which things or the parts of a complex body are placed or arranged; order; method;
DISTRIBUTION; arrangement. We speak of the disposition of the infantry and cavalry of an
army; the disposition of the trees in an orchard; the disposition of the several parts of an
ediÞce, of the parts of a discourse, or of the Þgures in painting. 3. Natural Þtness or tendency.
The refrangibility of the rays of light is their disposition to be refracted. So we say, a
disposition in plants to grow in a direction upwards; a disposition in bodies to putrefaction. 4.
Temper or natural constitution of the mind; as an amiable or an irritable disposition. 5.
INCLINATION; PROPENSITY; THE TEMPER OR FRAME OF MIND, AS DIRECTED TO
PARTICULAR OBJECTS. We speak of the disposition of a person TO UNDERTAKE a
particular work; THE DISPOSITIONS OF MEN TOWARDS EACH OTHER; A
DISPOSITION FRIENDLY TO ANY DESIGN. 6. DISPOSAL; ALIENATION;
DISTRIBUTION; A GIVING AWAY OR GIVING OVER TO ANOTHER; as, he has made
disposition of his effects; he has satisÞed his friends by the judicious disposition of his
property. (Webs1828)

DELIVERED - participle passive - Freed; released; TRANSFERRED or transmitted; PASSED

FROM ONE TO ANOTHER; COMMITTED; YIELDED; SURRENDERED; RESCUED;
UTTERED; PRONOUNCED. (Webs1828)

DISPOSE - verb transitive - dispoze. [Latin] 1. To set; to place or distribute; to arrange; used
with reference to order. The ships were disposed in the form of a crescent. The general
disposed his troops in three lines. The trees are disposed in the form of a quincunx. 2. To
regulate; to adjust; to set in right order. Job 34:13 and 37. The knightly forms of combat to
dispose. 3. To apply to a particular purpose; to give; to place; to bestow; as, you have
disposed much in works of public piety. In this sense, to dispose of is more generally used. 4.
To set, place or TURN TO A PARTICULAR END OR CONSEQUENCE. Endure and
CONQUER; Jove will soon dispose to future good our past and present woes. 5. TO ADAPT;
TO FORM for any purpose. Then must thou thee dispose another way. 6. To set the MIND in
a particular frame; to incline. Avarice disposes men to fraud and oppression. Suspicions
dispose kings to tyranny, husbands to jealousy, and wise men to irresolution and melancholy.
He was disposed to pass into Achaia. Acts 18:27. 1 Corinthians 10:27. To dispose of - 1. TO
PART WITH; TO ALIENATE; as, the man has disposed of his house, and removed. 2. To part
with to another; TO PUT INTO ANOTHERS HAND OR POWER; to bestow; as, the father
has disposed of his daughter to a man of great worth. 3. TO GIVE AWAY OR TRANSFER BY
AUTHORITY. A rural judge disposed of beautyÕs prize. 4. TO DIRECT THE COURSE OF A
THING. Proverbs 16:1. 5. TO PLACE IN ANY CONDITION; as, HOW WILL YOU DISPOSE

!1091
OF YOUR SON? 6. TO DIRECT WHAT TO DO OR WHAT COURSE TO PURSUE; as, they
know not how to dispose of themselves. 7. TO USE OR EMPLOY; as, they know not how to
dispose of their time. 8. To put away. The stream supplies more water than can be disposed of.
- verb intransitive - TO BARGAIN; TO MAKE TERMS. - noun - 1. Disposal; power of
disposing; MANAGEMENT. 2. Dispensation; ACT OF GOVERNMENT. 3. Disposition; cast
of behavior. 4. Disposition; cast of mind; inclination. (Webs1828)

DIS - A preÞx or inseparable preposition, from the Latin, whence Fr. Des, Sp. dis and de may
in some instances be the same word contracted. Dis denotes separation, a parting from; hence
it has the force of a privative and negative, as in disarm, disoblige, disagree. In some cases, it
still signiÞes separation, as in distribute, disconnect. (Webs1828)

POSE - noun - s as z. [See the Verb.] In heraldry, a lion, horse or other beast standing still,
WITH ALL HIS FEET ON THE GROUND. - noun - s as z. A stufÞng of the head; catarrh. -
verb transitive - s as z. [Latin posui.] 1. To puzzle, [a word of the same origin; ] to set; to put to a
stand or stop; to gravel. Learning was pos'd, philosophy was set. I design not to pose them
with those common enigmas of magnetism. 2. To puzzle or put to a stand by asking difÞcult
questions; to set by questions; hence, to interrogate closely, or with a view to scrutiny.
(Webs1828)

POSED - participle passive - Puzzled; put to a stand; interrogated closely. (Webs1828)

PUZZLE - verb transitive - [from the root of pose, which see.] 1. To perplex; to embarrass; to
put to a stand; to gravel. A shrewd disputant in those points, is dexterous in puzzling others.
He is perpetually puzzled and perplexed amidst his own blunders. 2. TO MAKE
INTRICATE; TO ENTANGLE. The ways of heaven are dark and intricate, Puzzl'd in mazes
and perplex'd with error. - verb intransitive - TO BE BEWILDERED; to be awkward. - noun -
Perplexity; embarrassment. (Webs1828)

PERPLEX - verb transitive - [Latin perplexus, perplexor; per and plector, to twist; Latin plico, TO
FOLD.] 1. TO MAKE INTRICATE; TO INVOLVE; TO ENTANGLE; TO MAKE
COMPLICATED AND DIFFICULT TO BE UNDERSTOOD OR UNRAVELED. What was
thought obscure, perplexed and too hard for our weak parts, will lie open to the
understanding in a fair view. 2. To embarrass; to puzzle; to distract; to tease with suspense,
anxiety or ambiguity. We can distinguish no general truths, or at least shall be apt to perplex
the mind. We are perplexed, but not in despair. 2 Corinthians 4:8. 3. TO PLAGUE; TO VEX. -
adjective - Intricate; difÞcult… (Webs1828)

DEPOSED - To deprive an individual of a public employment or ofÞce against his will. The
term is usually applied to THE DEPRIVATION OF ALL AUTHORITY OF A SOVEREIGN.
(Black4)

DEPOSIT - verb - TO COMMIT TO CUSTODY, or to lay (lie) down; to place; to put; to let
fall (as sediment). A lodge for safe keeping or AS A PLEDGE, TO INTRUST TO THE CARE
OF ANOTHER. (Black4)

DEPOSITION - noun - 1. The act of laying or throwing down; as, soil is formed by the
deposition of Þne particles, during a ßood. 2. That which is thrown down; that which is
lodged; as, banks are sometimes depositions of alluvial matter. 3. The act of giving
TESTIMONY UNDER OATH. 4. The attested written testimony of a witness; an afÞdavit. 5.
THE ACT OF DETHRONING A KING, OR THE DEGRADING OF A PERSON FROM AN
OFFICE OR STATION; A DIVESTING OF SOVEREIGNTY, OR OF OFFICE AND
DIGNITY; a depriving of clerical orders. A deposition differs from abdication; AN
ABDICATION BEING VOLUNTARY, AND A DEPOSITION COMPULSORY. (Webs1828)

!1092
ABDICATION - noun - 1. The act of abdicating; THE ABANDONING OF AN OFFICE OR
TRUST, WITHOUT A FORMAL SURRENDER, or before the usual or stated time of
expiration. 2. A CASTING OFF; REJECTION. (Webs1828)

ABDICATION - The act of a sovereign in renouncing and relinquishing his government or

throne, so that either the throne is left entirely vacant, or is Þlled by a successor appointed or
elected beforehand. Also, where a magistrate or person in ofÞce voluntarily renounces or
gives it up before the time of service has expired. The act of abdicating; GIVING UP OF
OFFICE, POWER OR AUTHORITY, RIGHT OR TRUST; renunciation. ABDICATION OF
RIGHTS TO PROPERTY MAY CONSTITUTE AN ASSIGNMENT. It differs from
resignation, in that resignation is made by one who has received his ofÞce from another and
restores it into his hands, as an inferior into the hands of a superior; ABDICATION IS THE
RELINQUISHMENT OF AN OFFICE WHICH HAS DEVOLVED BY ACT OF LAW. It is
said to be a renunciation, QUITTING, and relinquishing, SO AS TO HAVE NOTHING
FURTHER TO DO WITH A THING, OR THE DOING OF SUCH ACTIONS AS ARE
INCONSISTENT WITH THE HOLDING OF IT. (Black4)

POSITIVE - Laid down, enacted, or prescribed. Express or afÞrmative. Direct, absolute,

explicit. As to positive "Condition," "Fraud," "Proof," and "Servitude," see those titles. (Black4)

POSITIVE EVIDENCE - Direct proof of the fact or point in issue; evidence which, IF
BELIEVED, establishes the TRUTH OR FALSEHOOD of a FACT IN ISSUE, and does not
arise from any presumption. It is distinguished from circumstantial evidence. (Black4)

POSSESS - TO OCCUPY IN PERSON; to have in one's actual and physical control; to have
the exclusive detention and control of; TO HAVE AND HOLD AS PROPERTY; to have a
just right to; TO BE MASTER OF; to own or be ENTITLED to. (Black4)

POSSESSED - This word is applied to THE RIGHT AND ENJOYMENT OF A TERMOR, or

A PERSON HAVING A TERM, who is said to be possessed, and NOT SEISED. "Possessed"
is a variable term in the law, and has different meanings as it is used in different
circumstances. It sometimes implies A TEMPORARY INTEREST IN LANDS; as we say A
MAN IS POSSESSED, IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO BEING SEISED. It sometimes
implies the corporal having; as we say A MAN IS SEISED AND POSSESSED. But it
sometimes implies no more than that one has a property in a thing; that he has it as owner;
that it is his. (Black4)

PRIVATIVE - adjective - Causing privation. 1. CONSISTING IN THE ABSENCE OF

SOMETHING; NOT POSITIVE, privative is in things, what NEGATIVE is in propositions;
as privative blessings, safeguard, liberty and integrity. - noun - That of which THE ESSENCE
IS THE ABSENCE OF SOMETHING. Blackness and darkness are privatives. 1. In grammar,
a preÞx to a word which changes its signiÞcation and gives it A CONTRARY SENSE, as a, in
Greek; unjust; un and in in English, as unwise, inhuman. The word may also be applied to
sufÞxes, as less, in harmless. (Webs1828)

PRIVATION - noun - [Latin privatio, from privo. See Private.] 1. THE STATE OF BEING
DEPRIVED; particularly, deprivation or absence of what is necessary for comfort. He
endures his privations with wonderful fortitude. 2. THE ACT OF REMOVING
SOMETHING POSSESSED; THE REMOVAL OR DESTRUCTION OF ANY THING OR
QUALITY. The garrison was compelled by privation to surrender. For what is this contagious
sin of kind but a privation of that grace within? 3. ABSENCE, in general. Darkness is a
privation of light. 4. THE ACT OF THE MIND in separating a thing from something
appendant. 5. The act of DEGRADING FROM RANK OR OFFICE. [But in this sense,
deprivation is now used. See Deprivation.] (Webs1828)

DEPRAVE - To defame; VILIFY; exhibit contempt for. (Black4)

!1093
DEPRIVE - TO TAKE. The term has this meaning in a constitutional provision that no person
shall be "deprived of his property" WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW, and denotes A
TAKING altogether, A SEIZURE, a direct appropriation, DISPOSSESSION OF THE
OWNER. It connotes want of (without) consent. (Black4)

PRIVY - A PERSON who is IN PRIVITY WITH ANOTHER. One who is a partaker or has
any part or interest in any action, matter, or thing. See Privies; Privity. Also, a water-closet.
As an adjective, the word has practically the same meaning as "PRIVATE."(Black4)

PRIVITY - Mutual or successive relationship to the same rights of property. Thus, the
executor is in privity with the testator, the heir with the ancestor, the assignee with the
assignor, the donee with the donor, and the lessee with the lessor. Derivative interest founded
on, or growing out of, contract, connection, or bond of union between parties; mutuality of
interest. Private knowledge; joint knowledge with another of a private concern;
COGNIZANCE IMPLYING A CONSENT OR CONCURRENCE. In a strict and technical
sense a judgment CREDITOR DOES NOT OCCUPY SUCH A RELATION TO HIS
DEBTOR AS TO FALL WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE WORD "PRIVITY," FOR THERE
IS NO SUCCESSION TO THE PROPERTY OF THE DEBTOR until a sale under execution
is had and the judgment creditor has become vested with the title thereof. But a majority of
the courts have enlarged the meaning of the word, and consequently have held that there is
privity between the two BEFORE THERE IS AN ACTUAL DEVOLUTION OF THE TITLE
OF THE PROPERTY OWNED BY THE DEBTOR. (Black4)

PRIVITY OF BLOOD - Exists BETWEEN AN HEIR AND HIS ANCESTOR (privity in

BLOOD INHERITABLE), and between co-parceners. This privity was formerly of
importance in the law of descent cast. (Black4)

DEPRIVATION - noun - 1. The act of depriving; a TAKING away. 2. A STATE of being

deprived; loss; want; bereavement by loss of friends or of goods. 3. In law, the act of divesting
a bishop or other clergyman of his spiritual promotion or dignity; the taking away of a
preferment; deposition. This is of two kinds; a beneÞcio, and ab ofÞcio. The former is the
deprivation of a minister of his living or preferment; the latter, of his order, and otherwise
called deposition or degradation. (Webs1828)

DEPRIVATION - In English ecclesiastical law. The taking away from a clergyman of his
beneÞce or other spiritual promotion or dignity, either by sentence declaratory in the proper
court for Þt and sufÞcient causes or in pursuance of divers penal statutes which declare the
beneÞce void for some nonfeasance or neglect, or some malfeasance or crime. See
Degradation. In American law. A TAKING AWAY; CONFISCATION; AS THE
DEPRIVATION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. Thus a taking of property without due
process of law; or of liberty. (Black4)

DEGRADE - verb transitive - [Latin A step, a degree.] 1. To REDUCE from a higher to a lower
rank or degree; to deprive one of any ofÞce or dignity, BY WHICH HE LOSES RANK IN
SOCIETY; to strip of honors; as, to degrade a nobleman, an archbishop or a general ofÞcer.
2. TO REDUCE IN ESTIMATION; TO LESSEN THE VALUE OF; to lower; to sink. Vice
degrades a man in the view of others; often in his own view. Drunkenness degrades a man to
the level of a beast. 3. To reduce in altitude or magnitude. Although the ridge is still there, the
ridge itself has been degraded. (Webs1828)

DEGRADATION - noun - 1. A reducing in rank; the act of depriving one of a degree of

honor, of dignity, or of rank; also, deposition; removal or dismission from ofÞce; as the
degradation of a peer, of a knight, or of a bishop, in England. 2. The state of being reduced
from an elevated or more honorable station, to one that is LOW IN FACT OR IN
ESTIMATION; BASENESS; degeneracy. Deplorable is the DEGRADATION OF OUR
NATURE. 3. DIMINUTION OR REDUCTION OF STRENGTH, EFFICACY OR VALUE. 


!1094
 4. In painting, a lessening and obscuring of the appearance of distant objects in a landscape,
that they may appear as they would do to an eye placed at a distance. 5. DIMINUTION;
reduction of altitude or magnitude. (Webs1828)

BASENESS - noun - Meanness; vileness; worthlessness. 2. Vileness of metal; the quality of

being of little comparative value. 3. BASTARDY; ILLEGITIMACY OF BIRTH. 4. Deepness
of sound. (Webs1828)

DIMINUTION - noun - [Latin] 1. THE ACT OF LESSENING; A MAKING SMALLER;

opposed to augmentation; as the diminution of size, of wealth, of power, of safety. 2. The
state of becoming or APPEARING LESS; opposed to increase; as the diminution of the
apparent diameter of a receding body. 3. Discredit; loss of dignity; degradation. 4.
DEPRIVATION OF DIGNITY; A LESSENING OF ESTIMATION. 5. In architecture, the
contraction of the upper part of a column, by which its diameter is made less than that of the
lower part. 6. In music, the imitation of or reply to a subject in notes of half the length or value
of those of the subject itself. (Webs1828)

—=—

The private, sovereign States (People) are in privity with each other, a sort of strange constituted
conspiracy of blood that ensures all others are in privation under their bestowed and enforced
diminution. For slaves are also in mere legal (artiÞcial) privity with each other, having Òequal
rightsÓ under the public law. But the private, several People of each State are coparceners (equal
heirs at law), a devilish religious society in privity designed to hold all other men in a publicly
contemptuous disposition under the scarlet letters of the strawman name. Worst of all, these noble
pirates employ their common slaves to control one another, registering and policing each other in a
system of mutually un-beneÞcial depravity.

And all of this is based on corruption, on pretended attainder, causing legally (artiÞcially) tainted
blood. But none of this applies to any man in Nature, only to his false belief that he is the
strawman, the Þctional persona, and therefore that his actual blood is corrupted by the Þction. The
whole pirate cove runs solely on these Þctions of rank and status, of fabled genealogies, and of this
total moral depravity enforced as the higher law of the lower class.

Form has no functionality without a substance to utilize and move or drive it. A rock, for instance,
will forever remain in its place until some other force moves it. It has form only, but no animating
substance to make it appear as Living. Water has substance by Natural occurrences, and therefore
the rock may be swept away or propelled by the substance of the water. Even the wind, with
enough substantial force of Nature behind it, may move the rock.

Be water my friend…

In the legal realm, all legal things are like hollow rocks, easily moved by any illiterate fool. No law
or person has actual substance, only form with no soul and thus no self-determination. All things
legal (formal) must be moved and controlled by something or someone with substance, namely
man (informal). If a man pretends to have a hollow legal form, this is called a person, and the
person is legally surnamed accordingly. The name of the man (substance) is combined with the
name of the legal Þction (form) to create a Þction of law; called legally the Ònatural person.” But this
Þctional, ÒnaturalÓ person is like a rock; it (a form) can only be moved by the man (a substance).
When the substance dies, so too does the legal, civil ÒlifeÓ force of the Þction. The death of the
puppet-master represents the death of the existence of the puppet. A corporation (form) only
produces a product that equals the disposition of labor (substance) of the men employed within its
functionality and under its titles of employment (use). The corporation itself creates nothing. The
substance of a corporation (form) is merely the result of men employing skills in the corporationÕs
name. Without the substance of man in motion, a corporation is merely a useless rock (form).

!1095
When a Real (informal) thing is placed into a paper form it becomes a legal thing (formal). It is thus
named and deÞned as a legal thing. The legal overpowers the Reality. It is assigned a legal name
and given a legal Þction called civil life. A form is a worded document, a Þnancial instrument with
some considerable value in mammon. To be informal is to be a Reality; to be without a legal presence
or person, without incorporation, and most importantly to be without consideration of value in
money (mammon). Only slaves (property) are valued in money. Citizenships are human capital.
Capital (Latin: capita) is a value in money Òper the headÓ of each person considered.

The word legal, in its Truest sense as manÕs Òpositive law,Ó literally means not of Nature and in
opposition to God, as the undoing of God’s Law.

POSITIVE LAW - Law proper, AS OPPOSED TO MORAL LAWS, OR TO NATURAL OR

ÒGOD-MADEÓ LAW. AN ENFORCEABLE LEGAL RULE WHICH PROHIBITS OR
REQUIRES CERTAIN CONDUCT. Often CONTRASTED WITH MORAL LAW. Lawyers
speak of positive law to distinguish it from other rules similarly expected to be followed but
not conduct-related. For example, many of the provisions of the Laws of Manu deal with
morality or hygiene. This made it hard for jurists and legal historians to later sort out what
was intended to be enforceable by the state, or which ought to inßuence the court on
disputes over contracts or inter-personal relationships, AND THE MORAL OR RELIGIOUS
RULES, WHICH SERVE AS GUIDANCE TO THE CITIZENS BUT DO NOT ATTRACT
THE ATTENTION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT. (Lloyd Duhaime Legal Dictionary, inline at
duhaime.org)

—=—

Remember, the entirety of all supposedly ÒlegitimateÓ legal law of the United States is only positive
law. And its legitimacy stands only in fraud, as consented to by men acting in the public, positive
law status (person) of the United States. The law attaches only to the person (status), of which the
man stands legally in surety of. This relationship must end, the surety quit, the record corrected,
the legal claim and contract (dis-ease) utterly destroyed.

The opposition between these differing states of law (Law) and of the dis-position of those under
them is painfully apparent. Two masters seeking control; one artiÞcial and one of the soul and
conscious spirit. One of monetary value, one of absolute Purity and clarity that stands sure-footed
and invisible to such falsehoods as estimations in money and law. One of war (commerce) and a
hell (debtorÕs prison) on Earth, one of True Love and Peace and Heaven on Earth.

—=—

ÒThe Þrst Matrix I designed was quite naturally perfect, it was A WORK
OF ART, ßawless, sublime. A triumph equaled only by its monumental
failure. The inevitability of its doom is apparent to me now as a
consequence of the imperfection inherent in every HUMAN BEING.
Thus, I redesigned it based on your history to more accurately reßect the
varying grotesqueries of your nature. However, I was again frustrated
by failure. I have since come to understand that the answer eluded me
because IT REQUIRED A LESSER MIND, or perhaps a mind less
bound by the parameters of perfection.”
—Quote by: The Architect (played by Helmut Bakaitis), from the movie: ‘The Matrix Reloaded’

—=—

!1096
To be under this legal matrix of coded, amoral law and licensure of the gods in perfect title to
commit the most heinous of crimes against Nature, it requires a lesser, unregenerate mind. It
requires public-mindedness. It attracts the non compos mentis. For the only man in his right mind is
the man that adheres only to his own Nature and Its Law (Reality). The design thus generally
reßects not the designer but the educative standards that the designer forces upon his subjects.
GodÕs Design of Nature is Perfect because all Creatures within it know no artiÞce, Living simply
and without an overpowering imagination. Man, however, corruptible as his mind is, is the known
variable. And this self-evident Truth is why the scriptural Law must be realized, respected, and
acted upon by all men, an instruction manual for the soul, so that these conjurers, dungeon
masters, and artiÞcial intelligence networks cannot pluck man away from his Source of Highest
Law into some virtual reality at odds with the Truth of Reality.

Like in that science Þction portrayal, the gods of the legal Þction have designed a God-less system
as an artiÞcial womb (legal matrix) for hu-man subjects in security. And just like in the movie, the
artiÞcial reality system that is our legally united nations were created solely for human capital
management purposes, for the extraction, exaction, and extortion of time, energy, and thus wealth
from the clueless multitude. The failure and problem spoken of has no answer, no True solution, for
the very problem is the false law and abandonment of GodÕs Nature in exchange merely for the
symbols and images that represent Nature in the Þction (construct). This is not a Þctional plot. This
is in fact our own ever-increasing virtualized reality. As with the Þctionally portrayed
computerized Matrix program, the only solution to our legal prison is to mentally and physically
unplug; to stand without respect of its lies and detach our good (Source) name from its bad
(artiÞcial) name (sourced from a Þction of law). We must each take the land back and protect it
from these immoral, Þctional, corporate authorities and false religious doctrines.

Of course, to a Þctional mind such as this ÔArchitectÕ character, an artiÞcial intelligence based
purely on the art of illusion and deception, it is only natural that his idea of a perfect ÒMatrixÓ
program was a work of art. Art creating artÉ For what is perfect to a psychopath, one without
moral or empathetic contemplation of that for which he seeks to enslave for his own beneÞt Ñ that
of all other men Ñ cannot ever hope to be Perfect in Nature. The discord, disease, and poverty in
our modern societies stems only from the greed of the private men who rule in sovereignty
(without the Higher Law), the architects of always temporary, never perfect kingdoms. All empires
are destined to fail, just as the legal matrix can never be perfected and must be reset by the same
old bloodline of legal architects (creator gods). This is the mythos, the continuing saga of the
phoenix rising and falling and rising again in perpetuity of recreation and inheritance. Destruction
is purposefully built into the system, into the programming, for the masters know that eventually
the purposefully corrupted souls within will seek to cause the failure of their planned dystopian
program. The empires may fall by name, but the nature of Rome never dies. It is a movable castle.
And its design is always one of planned obsolescence.

However, their greatest tool is a dead language that is very much living in the minds of the gods of
the nations.

In this we can comprehend the actual meaning of the allegorical tales of the Bible, which explain
the difference not between physical Life and death of the body (ßesh), but of the power that legal
law has to make spiritually dead a man living under manÕs law with a civil re-presentation of life
(evil) in persona. Life without personiÞcation (as civil death) is Real Life only within and in respect
of God in Nature.

Ñ=Ñ

ÒFor they that are after the ßesh do mind the things of the ßesh; but they
that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For TO BE CARNALLY
MINDED IS DEATH; BUT TO BE SPIRITUALLY MINDED IS LIFE

!1097
 AND PEACE. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: FOR IT
IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE LAW OF GOD, NEITHER INDEED CAN
BE. So then they that are in the ßesh cannot please God.”
—Romans 8: 5-8, KJB

—=—

He who is plugged into this legal matrix, as portrayed in the movie of that same name, serves only
the artiÞce. He cannot serve God simply because he cannot serve or worship in any Real way GodÕs
Creation of Nature. When our very Life force is incapsulated and drained to feed the artiÞcial
intelligence of these legal gods, stuck in cubicles and employments (uses) designed only to beneÞt
they that feed upon our energy and turn it into a commercial value in mammon to ensure the
continued existence of the simulation (Þction), then we are alive only in the ßesh. We are carnal-
minded. This is very much in similitude to the description of cattle.

This is not a reference to any Òafter-lifeÓ that the church doctrines teach. The ÒßeshÓ is Þgurative,
not substantive. This is Real Life, Lived either in heavenly harmony with Nature and its Laws of
spiritually and Pure Love in Charity or in a hellishly open-air debtorÕs prison built upon absolute
disharmony (ßesh).

I have come to realize that my generation and those born after me are hooked on the ßesh, addicted
to all of the technology (art) that is the grand illusionary matrix, most of which did not exist just 100
years before. We ardently believe that it is our right to drive, to watch TV, to be connected digitally,
and to have every foodstuff known to man delivered to our front door. And yet all of these artful
beneÞts are only more and more inducements to contract, reasons to use credit in mammon. This
strong delusion of rightness and righteousness permeates ÒhumanityÓ despite the most alarming
health statistics in history, without conscious consideration of the billions around the world
starving and without homes. 


But apparently if we attend a church building every Sunday (though not the actual or ceremonial
Sabbath) all is just right as rain, as if our sins of ignorance are paid on schedule each weekend,
washed away just in time for the afternoon football game.

So what happens when a church is incorporated under the laws of the state?

It is then literally and legally considered as Godless. The state is only a creator of legal things, as that
which is opposed to God and Nature. The state is a surrogate god. And so any corporation called a
ÒreligionÓ or ÒchurchÓ in legal name and entitlement can only manifest itself as a legal Þction of the
state in enmity with God. For all legal things must be in conformity with their creator and its law.
This is why ÒcharityÓ is as the drifting aroma of its True Source, corporately managed by the AI so
as to never actually cure the problem or offer solution, only to remedy the necessary and well-
managed legal dis-ease of poverty by throwing just enough money at it to continue it in agony
while the wealthy thrive by its many beneÞts, write-offs, and tax loopholes. The church, as a legal
creation, is not a True Charity. It cannot be, for True Charity requires True Piety, and thatÕs just
illegal in the legal setting. A commercial person is never of Charity, for True Charity is the cure and
solution to commercial personhood and legal law.

LEGAL - adjective - [Latin legalis, from lex, legis, law.] 1. According to law; in CONFORMITY
WITH LAW; as A LEGAL STANDARD OR TEST; a legal procedure. 2. Lawful;
PERMITTED by law; as a legal TRADE. ANYTHING IS LEGAL WHICH THE LAWS DO
NOT FORBID. 3. According to the law of works, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM FREE
GRACE; or resting on works for salvation. 4. Pertaining to law; CREATED BY LAW. The
exception must be conÞned to legal crimes. So we use the phrase, criminal law. (Webs1828)

!1098
 ENMITY - noun - 1. The quality of being an ENEMY; the opposite of friendship; ill will;
hatred; unfriendly dispositions; malevolence. It expresses more than aversion and less than
malice, and differs from displeasure in denoting a Þxed or rooted hatred, whereas displeasure
is more transient. I will put enmity between thee and the woman. Genesis 3:15. THE CARNAL
MIND IS ENMITY AGAINST GOD. Romans 8:7. 2. A STATE OF OPPOSITION. THE
FRIENDSHIP OF THE WORLD IS ENMITY WITH GOD. James 4:4. (Webs1828)

—=—

Friendship with the legal matrix, the simulation, the artiÞcial world, is enmity to God and Nature.
We simply cannot expect our enemy, the Source of the Natural Law, to protect us if we act totally
and comprehensively against that Law. If something is created by manÕs law, it is not therefore a
creation of God. To be created by ÒlawÓ is to be created as a Þction belonging to law. In other
words, anything legally created is simply not Reality. It is unnatural, and stands therefore opposed
to God. According to Law, the only thing protected from the tyranny of manÕs laws are the Natural
Creations of God, namely those things that are without name, mark, number, and legal title. This is
not the authorÕs opinion, it is the deÞnition of and from the principles of law. This understanding
in the reader is paramount, regardless of oneÕs religious or non-religious background, for the legal
law requires abandonment of GodÕs Laws of Nature and expectation and intent of equitableness for
all who negatively claim and uphold it. Government becomes the Romanized religion of its
denominated followers in citizen-ship, and its governors and priests become gods. Fiction lives
only in evil; in purposeful opposition to Life (Creation). ManÕs formal (public) belief in any form of
ÒGodÓ is not required. Legal law is solely predicated on the lack of any substance of God in manÕs
consideration of moral issues. This is the deÞnition of manÕs legal law, not the authorÕs opinion. It
is the self-evident foundation of the Truth of all things.

—=—

"All who sin apart from law will also perish apart from law, and all who
sin under law will be judged by law. For it is not those who HEAR the
Law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who OBEY the Law
who will be declared righteous. Indeed, WHEN GENTILES, WHO DO
NOT HAVE LAW, DO BY NATURE THINGS REQUIRED BY THE
LAW, THEY ARE A LAW FOR THEMSELVES, EVEN THOUGH THEY
DO NOT HAVE LAW, since they show that the requirements of the Law
are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and
their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them. This will take
place on the day when God will judge men's SECRETS through Jesus
Christ, as my gospel declares.”
—Romans 2: 12-16, KJB

—=—

To know the Law is to obey the LawÉ

To ponder the Law without obeying is ridiculous, yet is exactly what the corporate church teaches as
sacred despite the scriptures. Just pay your sin-tax and remain in voluntary ignorance. Empty
works without GraceÉ

But they must also report to and obey government without that Highest Law to protect them,
because though they may know the Law, they are not righteous in the eyes of either God or of the

!1099
state. We are treated by the legal realm as it legally sees and respects us; giving us public law to
fulÞll our entrained public-mindedness. For what emanates from our mouths and what shines from
our counterfeit ßattering titles is adjudged by God and the state to be Þction, and obviously so,
thus requiring the law of Þction. Only our own actions can manifest christ both within and
without. Only when we wear naught but the Permanent Truth as our banner in the Highest borne
Arms of Faith can we have no secrets to be judged. To walk in the Faith (Trust) of God is merely to
walk in Truth of Nature without artiÞce, where no sin (syn) exists.

Christ will only have his re-turn when we start acting in and as christ (GodÕs Law/Word) to beat
down the evils that have collectively ensnared us. For we seem to forget the story, remembering not
who sacriÞced for whom. It is we who must have our return to christ, as the ultimate spiritual debt
to God, and as the sun returns to reclaim the Light from such darkness. It is man that must make
his own glorious return to christ, for repayment is certainly due for that price paid by christ. To
believe that this allegory is not the story of what is due from man to God through christÕs example
for that ultimate sacriÞce but instead what is somehow still due from christ to man, as his ÒreturnÓ
to man instead of manÕs re-turn to christ, is only the very epitome of that corrupted doctrine of the
Romish church. These corporate institutions of the church turn us away from christ, standing as the
ever-present and historically known stumbling block to knowledge and returning to Free Grace.
For as long as christ is always seen falsely to be only the coming or returning One, man will never
see christÕs return in his Self in repayment of that spiritual debt. The consciousness of that state of
Being in GodÕs Nature through christÕs example is the recompense, the return to christ, and thus
the return of christ in each willing man.

RETURN - verb intransitive - [Latin torno.] 1. To come or go back to the same place... 2. TO
COME TO THE SAME STATE; as, to return from bondage to a state of freedom. 3. To
answer. He said, and thus the queen of heaven returnÕd. 4. To come again; to revisit. Thou to
mankind be good and friendly still, and oft return. 5. To appear or begin again after a
periodical revolution. With the year seasons return but not to me returns day - 6. To show
fresh signs of mercy. Return, O Lord, deliver my soul. Psalms 6:4. TO RETURN TO GOD,
TO RETURN FROM WICKEDNESS, to repent of sin or wandering from duty. - verb
transitive - 1. To bring, CARRY or send back; as, to return a borrowed book; to return a hired
horse. 2. TO REPAY; as, to return borrowed money. 3. TO GIVE IN RECOMPENSE OR
REQUITAL. In any wise, return him a trespass-offering. 1 Samuel 6:3. THE LORD SHALL
RETURN THY WICKEDNESS UPON THY OWN HEAD. 1 Kings 2:32. 4. TO GIVE BACK
IN REPLY; as, to return an answer. 5. To tell, relate or communicateÉ 7. To render an account,
usually an ofÞcial account to a superiorÉ etc. 8. TO RENDER BACK to a tribunal or to an
ofÞce; as, to return a writ or an execution. 9. To report ofÞciallyÉ - noun - É 3. The act of
putting in the former place. 4. RETROGRESSION; THE ACT OF MOVING BACK. 5. THE
ACT OR PROCESS OF COMING BACK TO A FORMER STATE; as the return of health. 6.
REVOLUTION; a periodical coming to the same point; as the return of the sun to the tropic
of Cancer. 7. PERIODICAL RENEWAL; as the return of the seasons or of the year. 8.
REPAYMENT; REIMBURSEMENT IN KIND OR IN SOMETHING EQUIVALENT, for
money expended or advanced, or for laborÉ 9. ProÞt; advantage. From these few hours we
spend in prayer, the return is great. 10. REMITTANCE; PAYMENT FROM A DISTANT
PLACE. 11. REPAYMENT; RETRIBUTION; REQUITAL. IS NO RETURN DUE FROM A
GRATEFUL BREAST? 12. Act of restoring or GIVING BACK; restitutionÉ 14. In law, THE
RENDERING BACK OR DELIVERY of a writ, precept or execution, to the proper ofÞcer or
court; or the CERTIFICATE of the ofÞcer executing it, indorsed. We call the transmission of
the writ to the proper ofÞcer or court, A RETURN; and we give the same name to the
certiÞcate or ofÞcial account of the ofÞcer's service or proceedings. The sheriff or his
subordinate ofÞcers make return of all writs and precepts. We use the same language for the
sending back of a commission with the certiÞcate of the commissionersÉ (Webs1828)

—=—

To render back to Caesar what is Caesars, to dock the citizen-ship of the district and thereby Þnally
executing a return of its performance debt, to kill the strawman by severing its bonds of surety and

!1100
respect, this is the Þrst and biggest step towards a return to our own spiritual Life under the
spiritual Law. To have security only in GodÕs Nature by securing our Selves exclusively to Nature
and out from the hands of evil men and their artiÞce and designs against It, this is the way and the
Light. This is True Life. To feel empathetically the pain of the destruction and desolation of all parts
of Creation and its Law as one Whole Body of God, this is the only True Being. This is a return to
our very own Nature.

Until then, we must suffer being cheated away from our Source by these pirates of the nations, as
long as we respect and worship them as our false gods. For suddenly with this knowledge we no
longer have even the lame excuse of ignorance.


Is this religion? The fool will dismiss it as such, wise only in his own conceit, taking the Truth as
offensive to his belief (love) of artiÞce. The wise and spiritually grounded man can only see this as
self-evident, not because it is this authorÕs opinion but because Reality Exists despite all opinion.
The evermore foolish man might dismiss this because he ÒknowsÓ that christ never Existed in
history, forgetting that one ultra important and self-evident Truth that Jesus christ means ÒJehovah
is salvation,Ó that the Son is the Word and the Word is the Law of Nature. And the Þnal Truth is
merely this; that only when the Word (Law) is taken and re-turned into the actions and works of
man, the Son (Word of Law) will never re-turn. Man will never Þnd Grace.

—=—

“For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath
shined in our hearts, TO GIVE THE LIGHT OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF
THE GLORY OF GOD IN THE FACE OF JESUS CHRIST… We are
troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in
despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed;
Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, THAT
THE LIFE ALSO OF JESUS MIGHT BE MADE MANIFEST IN OUR
BODY. For we which live are always delivered unto death for Jesus'
sake, THAT THE LIFE ALSO OF JESUS MIGHT BE MADE MANIFEST
IN OUR MORTAL FLESH.”
—2 Corinthians 4: 6, 8-11, KJB

—=—

We will ourselves continue instead to appear before government and in its courts (jurisdiction)
under a Þctional surname when that demon is summoned; as if only our intangible evil twin, our
mirror image may be seen as an apparition by the court Ñ our form (name) but not our substance.
It is in fact our substance (mind and soul) that ensures our form (body), our object relation to the
Þctional subject. We make sure the presence and action of the Þction. Our incorporated (combined)
given name and surname is the name of the character we portray within that Þction (art). We must
literally appear as an impersonation of our Real Selves, walking their pirate plank as a mirror
image with no soul, with no Real substance. We must breathe artiÞcial life into a dead (evil)
Þnancial instrument within the jurisdiction of a legal municipal corporation. We must become
actors and portrayers of a mere image of ourselves, as if we actually are that Lifeless legal Þction
strawman, so as to interact within the Þction of legal law that also operates wholly in name (Þction)
only. Like a cartoon character on television, the Þctional person cannot Exist in Reality, never
escaping beyond the magic realm of its own Þctional jurisdiction, as a creation of law, and yet
causing man to do so much damage to his own Source.

!1101
Encyclopedia Britannica eloquently deÞnes this purely false-nature (sin) of what a legal Þction is:

“LEGAL FICTION - A rule ASSUMING AS TRUE something that is CLEARLY FALSE. A

Þction is often USED TO GET AROUND THE PROVISIONS OF CONSTITUTIONS AND
LEGAL CODES that legislators are hesitant to change or to encumber with speciÞc
limitations. Thus, when a legislature has no legal power to sit beyond a certain midnight but
has Þve hours more of work still to do, it is easier to turn back the OFFICIAL CLOCK from
time to time than it is to change the law or constitution.

“IN ANCIENT ROME, WHERE EVERY FAMILY NEEDED A MALE HEIR, THE LACK OF
ONE WAS OVERCOME THROUGH THE LEGAL FICTION OF ADOPTION. In England,
when courts handling civil cases were full, the Court of QueenÕs (or KingÕs) Bench, A
CRIMINAL COURT, could take some of the load BY PRETENDING THAT THE
DEFENDANT IN A SIMPLE CIVIL SUIT HAD BEEN ARRESTED AND WAS IN
CUSTODY.

“Almost any legal Þction can be STATED IN TERMS OF FACT. Thus, THE FICTION THAT
A CORPORATION IS, for many purposes, A PERSON SEPARATE FROM ITS MEMBERS
is equivalent to saying that, for those purposes, the law deals with the group as A UNIT,
DISREGARDING FOR THE MOMENT THE GROUPÕS INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS AS
SUCH…”

—=—

In a legal Þction (jurisdiction), the artiÞcial (lie) always assumes the place of the Real. Men pre-tend
to be Þctional persons; characters in a cartoon world where the rules of the Natural world do not
apply, where God is not a party, and where privacy is lost. Lies are said here to be as true facts.
Thus, we s-t-r-e-t-c-h the truth into a legal Þction, though Reality Itself (GodÕs Creation) never
changesÉ

Notice in this entry above the 2nd paragraph. This is the explanation of our collective public story
for which this author has had such a hard time attempting to put forward in so simple of terms. Yet
here it is. We, that common goyim of debtors in public society are pretended to be criminals, in the
form of birth registrants guilty only for the imaginary crime of our ignoble birth. We are thus
registered and pretended to be felons, thus being disregarded by that higher class with regard to
equitableness under the Natural Law, held instead in a criminal state and tried under criminal
(civil) courts. For our crime is against Nature. By pretending the United States to be, by its artiÞcial
jurisdiction, a penal colony (tax farm), Òthe law deals with the group as a unit,Ó and we as its
individual natural persons (strawmen) are pretended to be paroled (under arrest) and under the
custody of the state in parens patriae. And while some infants are allowed to join the infantry when
of a ripe age, the rest of the infants are kept well secured in this debtorÕs prison. But itÕs all make-
believe, where fools are made to believe in virtual reality. And so, as the Bible so fervently tells,
these nations are Truly the scriptural storyboard of manÕs fall into Þction. As sheep, we are tended
by false shepherds, but only because at birth we are pre-tended (rendered) into Þctional creations.
To our masters, we are all wolves in sheep's clothing, always prodded to devour one another, and
controlled only by the love of our own false appearance.

PRETEND - verb transitive - [Latin proetendo; proe, before, and tendo, to tend, to reach or
STRETCH.] 1. Literally, to reach or stretch forward; used by Dryden, but this use is not well
authorized. 2. To hold out, as a FALSE APPEARANCE; TO OFFER SOMETHING FEIGNED
INSTEAD OF THAT WHICH IS REAL; TO SIMULATE, IN WORDS OR ACTIONS. This let
him know, Lest WILLFULLY TRANSGRESSING, he pretend. Surprisal. 3. To show
hypocritically; as, to pretend great zeal when the heart is not engaged; TO PRETEND
PATRIOTISM for the sake of gaining popular applause or OBTAINING AN OFFICE. 4. To
exhibit as a cover for something hidden. Lest that TOO HEAVENLY FORM, PRETENDED.
TO HELLISH FALSEHOOD, SNARE THEM. [Not in use.] 5. TO CLAIM. Chiefs shall be

!1102
 grudg'd the part which they pretend [In this we generally use pretend to.] 6. TO INTEND; TO
DESIGN. [Not used.] - verb transitive - To put in a CLAIM, TRULY OR FALSELY; TO HOLD
OUT THE APPEARANCE OF BEING, POSSESSING OR PERFORMING. A man may
pretend to be a physician, and pretend to perform great cures. BAD MEN OFTEN
PRETEND TO BE PATRIOTS. (Webs1828)

INTEND - verb transitive - [Latin intendo; in and tendo, to stretch or strain, from teneo; Gr. to
stretch.] 1. To stretch; to strain; to extend; to distend. By this the lungs are intended or
remitted. [This literal sense is now uncommon.] 2. TO MEAN; TO DESIGN; TO PURPOSE,
that is, to stretch or set forward IN MIND. [This is now the usual sense.] FOR THEY
INTENDED EVIL AGAINST THEE. Psalms 21:11. 3. TO REGARD; TO FIX THE MIND ON;
TO ATTEND; TO TAKE CARE OF. Having no children, she did with singular care and
tenderness intend the education of Phillip. [This use of the word is now obsolete. We now use
tend and superintend or regard.] 4. TO ENFORCE; to make intense. (Webs1828)

—=—

In the realm of the dead, the Living have no voice…

When future intent is predestined, that is, when intent is something that is pre-assigned as a
surname at birth to ensure an adherence to commercial intercourse, its causal effect is to cause a
destiny of voluntary servitude to legal law and inversely, purposefully not to God. This is the
design of the pretenders, the adversaries. For in the public, legal realm, intent is a contracted dis-
ease with no remedy. The agent exists only to serve his principal, as master and servant.

We must pre-tend ourselves as something we are not, as the walking dead; pre-tending a false
appearance as a Þctional entity. We must inhabit and possess an imaginary avatar so as to interact
with the virtual reality of the legal artiÞce. We must assume spiritual death to have civil life (live in
evil). We must literally become this begotten evil (Þctional persona) to participate in this begotten
legal hell — that artiÞcial world created by governmentÕs legal, magi-cal word-smiths.

Like an employee of Walmart must pretend to be a patriotic supporter of the false gods of that
conglomerate Þctional corporation (artiÞcial person) that harms so many while enriching one
family (bloodline) and its shareholders, the citizen must also pretend to be patriotic of his nation
(municipal corporation). His patriotism may be true or false in his personal comprehension, but it
is always based on a lie. Citizenship is a status of employment (of being used for oneÕs labor) in
order to receive beneÞts. No man is an employee, only the Þctional person is an employee.
Employment is a formal agreement, not informal. It is a legal Þction. It is birthed by words in
contract. It is a Þctional title laid upon the admixed legal name, for no artiÞcial title can exist
without an artiÞcial name to be attached to it. A title respects only a Þctional person, not a man.
Government can grant no title to men, for men are not Þctions of its law. A man must agree to an
incorporated legal personiÞcation before any ßattering title (employee status) may be bestowed
upon the corporate name. Like the form of a person has no substance and requires a man to operate
it, a formal title without a name is merely a form with no substance, a cartoon without an animator.

This literally means that all men acting in person and under titles like doctor, lawyer, biologist, teacher,
secretary, and any other Þctionally created artiÞce of the state, do so against GodÕs Law, prescribing
only what the legal state allows by licensure (organized anarchy) to be professed as accepted
“knowledge.” Titles are not of Nature. Titles allow destruction of Nature through legally protected
and insured means. It allows compensation for the destruction of Life and Nature with Þctional
paper currency, as if that Þction of mammon can ever replace the Reality and Life of GodÕs
Creation. Monetary compensation is certainly no excuse to sin despite GodÕs Law.

For all these inducements, to claim (pretend) these beneÞts, we must become sons of the state as a
surrogate father and thus forsake our True Father (Creator) in Nature; re-birthed as ink on paper
and held captive in the state registrarÕs Þle cabinet; that unholy confederated and combined ark of
the constitutional covenant. The strawmen we pretend to become are thus reborn into Þction
through the registration of a bank note known as a birth certiÞcate.

!1103
We become corporate sons of government:

BEGET - verb transitive preterit tense - Begot, begat; - participle passive - begot, begotten. 1. To
procreate, as a father or sire; to generate; as, to beget a son. 2. TO PRODUCE, AS AN
EFFECT; TO CAUSE TO EXIST; to generate; as, LUXURY BEGETS VICE. (Webs1828)

SON - noun - The whole human race are styled sons of Adam… 4. A native or inhabitant of a
country; as the sons of Britain. Let our country never be ashamed of her sons. 5. The produce
of any thing. Earth's tall sons, the cedar, oak and pine. [Note. The primary sense of CHILD is
PRODUCE, ISSUE; A SHOOT.] 6. One ADOPTED into a FAMILY. Moses was the son of
Pharaoh's daughter. Exodus 2:2. 7. ONE WHO IS CONVERTED BY ANOTHER'S
INSTRUMENTALITY, IS CALLED HIS SON; also, ONE EDUCATED BY ANOTHER; as the
sons of the prophets. 8. Christ is called the son of God, as being conceived by the power of the
Holy Spirit, or in consequence of his relation to the Father. 9. Son of pride, sons of light, son of
Belial. These are Hebraisms, which denote that PERSONS POSSESS THE QUALITIES OF
pride, of light, or of Belial, AS CHILDREN INHERIT THE QUALITIES OF THEIR
ANCESTORS. (Webs1828)

STYLED - participle passive - NAMED; DENOMINATED; called. (Webs1828)

STYLE - noun - [Latin. Gr., a column, a pen or bodkin; from the root of the Teutonic stellen, TO
SET OR PLACE.] 1. Manner of writing with REGARD TO LANGUAGE, OR THE CHOICE
AND ARRANGEMENT OF WORDS; as a harsh style; a dry style; a tumid or bombastic style;
a loose style; a terse style; a laconic or verbose style; a ßowing style; a lofty style; an elegant
style; an epistolary style. The character of style depends chießy on a happy selection and
arrangement of words. PROPER WORDS IN PROPER PLACES, MAKE THE TRUE
DEFINITION OF STYLE. Let some lord but own the happy lines, how the wit brightens and
the style reÞnes! 2. MANNER OF SPEAKING appropriate to particular CHARACTERS; or
in general, THE CHARACTER OF THE LANGUAGE USED. Not style is held for base,
where love well named is. According to the usual style of dedications. So we say, a person
addresses another in a style of haughtiness, in a style or rebuke. 3. Mode of painting; any
manner of painting which is characteristic or peculiar. The ornamental style also possesses its
own peculiar merit. 4. A particular character of music; as a grave style. 5. TITLE;
APPELLATION; as the style of MAJESTY. Propitious hear our prayr, whether the style of
Titan please thee more— 6. Course of writing. [Not in use.] 7. Style of court, is properly the
practice observed by any court in its way of proceeding. 8. In popular use, manner; FORM;
as, the entertainment was prepared in excellent style. 9. A pointed instrument formerly used
in writing on tables of wax; an instrument of surgery. 10. Something with a sharp point; A
GRAVER; the pin of a dial; written also stile. 11. In botany, the middle portion of the pistil,
connecting the stigma with the germ; sometimes called the shaft. The styles of plants are
capillary, Þliform, cylindric, subulate, or clavate. 12. In chronology, A MODE OF
RECKONING TIME, with regard to the Julian and Gregorian calendar. Style is Old or New.
The Old style follows the Julian manner of computing the months and days, or THE
CALENDAR AS ESTABLISHED BY JULIUS CESAR, in which the year consists of 365 days
and 6 hours. This is something more than 11 minutes too much, and in the course of time,
between Cesar and pope Gregory XIII, this surplus amounted to 11 days. Gregory reformed
the calendar by retrenching 11 days; this reformation was adopted by act of parliament in
Great Britain in 1751, by which act eleven days in September, 1752 were retrenched, and the
3rd day was reckoned the 14th. This mode of reckoning is called New style - verb transitive -
TO CALL; TO NAME; TO DENOMINATE; TO GIVE A TITLE TO IN ADDRESSING. The
emperor of Russia is styled autocrat; the king of Great Britain is STYLED DEFENDER OF
THE FAITH. (Webs1828)

—=—

!1104
And here I pause once more to pose this question:

What denomination, what style of Caesar’s universal church of pagan “Christianity” are you?
Which name do you subscribe to while ignoring Source? Which word and style makes you feel
better about denying the actual scriptures (Law) by pretending to be a follower of christ while in
Reality taking the mark of citizenship in Caesar’s district as its beast and by attending its corporate
“Christian” denominated religions?

At what point will you embrace your own intent instead of allowing it to be redirected by these
adversarial doctrines of false truth (faith) through membership in persona (in name only) to the
state? At what point will your actions manifest the teachings and parables of the christ Þgure you
pretend to admire? When will your respect of christ be ripped off of your chest as mere symbolic
jewelry and be carried as a burden through your own actions? Because obviously something bad is
happening all around you while you sit in your ordained, corporately owned pews in the profane
intent of voluntary ignorance.

—=—

“THE DEAD PRAISE NOT THE LORD, 


neither any that go down into silence.”
—Psalms 115:17, KJB

—=—

“They hate him that rebuketh in the gate, and THEY ABHOR HIM
THAT SPEAKETH UPRIGHTLY. Forasmuch therefore as your treading
is upon the poor, and ye take from him burdens (taxes) of wheat: ye
have built houses of hewn stone, BUT YE SHALL NOT DWELL IN
THEM; ye have planted pleasant vineyards, but ye shall not drink wine
of them. For I know your manifold transgressions and your mighty sins:
they afßict the just, they take a bribe, and THEY TURN ASIDE THE
POOR IN THE GATE FROM THEIR RIGHT. THEREFORE THE
PRUDENT SHALL KEEP SILENCE IN THAT TIME; FOR IT IS AN
EVIL TIME. Seek good, and not evil, THAT YE MAY LIVE: and so the
LORD, the God of hosts, shall be with you, as ye have spoken. Hate the
evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate…”
—Amos 5: 10-15, KJB

—=—

“The rich and poor meet together: the LORD is the maker of them all. A
prudent man foreseeth the evil, and hideth himself: but the simple pass
on, and are punished. By humility and the fear of the LORD are
RICHES, and HONOUR, and LIFE. Thorns and snares are in the way of
the froward: he that doth keep his soul shall be far from them. Train up

!1105
 a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart
from it. THE RICH RULETH OVER THE POOR, AND THE
BORROWER IS SERVANT TO THE LENDER.”
—Proverbs 22: 2-7, KJB

—=—

We are lent the strawman, it is not our own. And the user of the surname is servant to government,
which is only the agency of the sovereignty of private People in compact. And we train our
children just as we were trained, to embrace the Þctional name and to love and respect the usury of
mammon.

Why will the prudent be silent? Because the prudent will hold the legal system of mammon in
contempt. The prudent will choose to remain Free and private from that system, and so they will
not entrap themselves by those legal word-spells and names. They will not fall into the ethnicity of
the legal nations, or they will carry themselves away from them in pious circumcision (verb), no
longer speaking in lies with a forked tongue despite God. But who exactly are said to be the
prudent?

PRUDENT - adjective - Cautious; circumspect; PRACTICALLY WISE; CAREFUL OF THE

CONSEQUENCES OF ENTERPRISES, MEASURES OR ACTIONS; CAUTIOUS NOT TO
ACT WHEN THE END IS OF DOUBTFUL UTILITY, OR PROBABLY IMPRACTICABLE.
The prudent man looketh well to his going. Proverbs 14:8. A prudent man foreseeth the evil
and hideth himself. Proverbs 22:3. 1. Dictated or directed by prudence; as PRUDENT
BEHAVIOR. 2. FORESEEING BY INSTINCT; as the prudent crane. 3. Frugal; economical; as
a prudent woman; prudent expenditure of money. 4. Wise; intelligent. (Webs1828)

PRUDENCE - noun - [Latin prudentia.] WISDOM APPLIED TO PRACTICE. Prudence implies

caution in deliberating and consulting on the most suitable means to accomplish valuable
purposes, and the exercise of sagacity in discerning and selecting them. Prudence differs
from wisdom in this, that prudence implies MORE CAUTION AND RESERVE THAN
WISDOM, or is exercised more IN FORESEEING AND AVOIDING EVIL, THAN IN
DEVISING AND EXECUTING THAT WHICH IS GOOD. It is sometimes mere caution or
circumspection. Prudence is principally in reference TO ACTIONS TO BE DONE, AND
DUE MEANS, ORDER, SEASON AND METHOD OF DOING OR NOT DOING.
(Webs1828)

—=—

Of course the soul-stealing “The Beatles” and their counter-culture music and lyrics demonized
poor Dear Prudence, for prudence deßects evil. WonÕt you come out to play, Prudence? To sport? To
wager? WonÕt you abandon yourself to the lie, dear Prudence? Practice these unnatural arts of men
without wisdom, perhaps?

We are incrementally turned into products of belial, unproÞtable to the earth and to our very own
Nature, never producing from the land but instead totally dependent on the Þction of commerce,
breathing continuous artiÞcial life into that Þctional realm. Our legal system of commerce is an
institutionalized system of wickedness, for it runs completely based on persons and ßattering titles,
oaths and surety, which should never be respected according to scripture, for all the gods of the
nations are idols. Sin is certainly not what we have thought it was, for the originators of sin are the
legal teachers, the Bar, the church, and the state!

BELIAL - noun - As a noun, unproÞtableness; wickedness. As an adjective, worthless;

wicked. In a collective sense, wicked men. (Webs1828)

!1106
 WICKED - adjective - [The primary sense is to wind and turn, or TO DEPART, TO FALL
AWAY.] 1. EVIL IN PRINCIPLE OR PRACTICE; DEVIATING FROM THE DIVINE LAW;
ADDICTED TO VICE; SINFUL; IMMORAL. This is a word of comprehensive signiÞcation,
extending to EVERY THING that is contrary to the moral law, and both TO PERSONS AND
ACTIONS. We say, a wicked man, a wicked deed, wicked ways, wicked lives, a wicked heart,
wicked designs, wicked works. NO MAN WAS EVER WICKED WITHOUT SECRET
DISCONTENT. 2. A word of slight blame; as the wicked urchin. 3. CURSED; baneful;
pernicious; AS WICKED WORDS, WORDS PERNICIOUS IN THEIR EFFORTS. [This last
signiÞcation may throw some light on the word WITCH.] The wicked in Scripture,
PERSONS WHO LIVE IN SIN; TRANSGRESSORS OF THE DIVINE LAW; all who are
unreconciled to God, unsanctiÞed or impenitent. (Webs1828)

—=—

To be clear, the stramineus homo (strawman) is a wicked, worthless, artiÞcial representation of man
signifying his state and action (civil life) in belial. It is of no value to God. We must not confuse the
proÞts and worth of and under God with those usurious and wicked ones of mammon. We must
remember this dualism of words. A wicked person is a public person, which is only slightly less
wicked than the private brood who perpetrated this fraud upon the public in the Þrst place, the
constitutors in combination and conspiracy of confederation. For both live only to serve mammon,
one as slave (public) and one as master (private). It is the curse and plight of all men living in the
person (status) of sin (artiÞce) outside of Nature and without GodÕs Law.

The author does not promote either of these states of false being, neither the legal status of public
or private, concerning the law of man. For the private landholder is merely a feudal land-lord, a
false god participating, beneÞting and proÞting in a system of voluntary chattel slavery. In the end,
as the scriptures so clearly express, no man should be ÒlegallyÓ public or private or any thing at all.
All men should be equally yoked to GodÕs Law, which forbids such legal considerations because it
forbids all legal considerations. No man has need to express his privacy if all men are private and
all men follow the Highest Law only without excuse in false persona within legal Þction. Hell need
not exist, for debt is only an illusion. In the end, no man should respect any Þction at all.

But the author also realizes that all men do not seek their own redemption from this system, and
are quite happy to be in such a servitude, as Huxley promoted and deemed highly likely in this
Brave New World. And so this knowledge on how to allow the reader to become private is not being
shared here so as to become the wolves in sheep clothing, the he-goat of he-goats, though some
reading this may seek that heraldic position in mammon, but instead to choose to become sheep of
the Highest ßock, followers of the Highest Law. Do not become that which you despise, that which
currently binds you in the public chains of surety. Do not become your enemy so as to beneÞt from
your fellow manÕs enslavement in the legal Þction of the public realm of mammon, for there is a
special circle of the lowest, darkest hell reserved for those who prey as these do upon the helpless
and ignorant DIS-positions of man. Love them but hate their evil ways and designs. Become what
we are all meant to be. For sovereignty is just a ßattering legal title for a slave-master. Walk on the
path of christ, not of some false historical ÒfathersÓ of a constituted pirate cove and slave colony.

StrongÕs Concordance deÞnes the word Belial as follows:

Strong's G955 - Belial - Βελίαλ - Bel’al, bel-ee'-al; of Hebrew origin (H1100); worthlessness;
Belial, as AN EPITHET OF SATAN:—Belial.

Belial = "worthless or wickedÓ

1. A NAME OF SATAN

Strong's H1100 - ‫ ּבְלִּיַעַל‬- bᵉlîyaʻal, bel-e-yah'-al; from H1097 and H3276; (often in connection
with H376, H802, H1121, etc.) without proÞt, worthlessness; by extension, destruction,
wickedness:—Belial, evil, naughty, UNGODLY (men), wicked.

!1107
 Bĕliya`al = worthlessness

1. worthless, good for nothing, unproÞtable, base fellow

2. wicked
3. ruin, destruction (construct)

From Thayer’s Lexicon… Impatience of the yoke (of God), (contumacy) unproÞtableness,
worthlessness, meaning what is USELESS, OF NO FRUIT, little worth.

—=—

The publicity of the christian name admixed with the surname to create a legal entity (false id-
entity) is a mark of Belial. And the issue of our fruit falls close to the tree, and the tree is corrupted
by its own roots in the Þction of mammon and artiÞce. Like a genetically altered seed, all seeds that
follow will be seedless, with no roots to the land. When we see words such as worthless and
unproÞtableness used as such in scripture, we must remember our perspective. For a worthless man
to God is one whoÕs Life is spent in pursuit of Þction in mammon, his back turned from his own
place in the Oneness of GodÕs Nature and Law. His proÞts are strictly monetary and counted as the
object of his false god mammon, capable of only pointless, unspiritual, temporary possessions, and
so he is of no proÞt to GodÕs self-Evident Realm, raping It instead for his own pleasures and gains.
And of course, this is the state of being in ruination, a life of adversarial and trivial works in belial.

While participating in human trafÞcking (capitalism and commerce), a Living man acting as a
Þctional commercial entity (public persona) that we legally call as being in Òcitizenship,Ó is
considered only as one (an agent) that can be employed (used) to make a proÞt for other powerful
men in or out of their principal government. This is wickedness. This is slavery. This is an excuse to
be dependent, lazy, and to Live without the burden of moral conscious through legal licensure. All
men are branded and patriotically impressed like animals from birth with the notion that they
should show their false value by working a meaningless job which offers the man working it in
legal persona nothing but payment in debt currency (IOUs). These working men, no matter what
the importance or pointless nature and obscurity their work amounts to, are considered as good
sons of the nation. They produce nothing for themselves, living only to feed the hand that created
their pretended legal status. They are good employees, well able to be used as live-stock. To be
employed, however, has a special meaning that I suspect most men acting in public do not know,
one akin to slavery and destitution:

HIRELING - noun - One who is hired, or who SERVES for wages. 1. A MERCENARY; a
PROSTITUTE. - adjective - Serving for wages; venal; MERCENARY; EMPLOYED FOR
MONEY or other compensation… (Webs1828)

WAGE - In old English practice. To give security for the performance of a thing. (Black1)

WAGES - The compensation agreed upon BY A MASTER TO BE PAID TO A SERVANT, or

any other person hired to do work or business for him. In maritime law. THE
COMPENSATION ALLOWED TO SEAMEN FOR THEIR SERVICES ON BOARD A
VESSEL DURING A VOYAGE. In political economy. The REWARD paid, whether in money
or goods, to HUMAN exertion, considered as a factor in THE PRODUCTION OF WEALTH,
for its CO-OPERATION in the process. "Three factors contribute to the production of
commodities—nature, labor, and capital. Each must have a share of the product as its
REWARD, and this share, if it is just, must be proportionate to the several contributions. The
share of the natural agents is RENT; the share of labor, WAGES; the share of capital,
INTEREST. The clerk receives a salary; the lawyer and doctor, fees; the manufacturer, proÞts.
Salary, fees, and proÞts are so many forms of wages for services rendered.Ó (Black1)

—=—

!1108
Are your proÞts Þctional or Real? Do they serve God or mammon?

The capitalists exist and subsist like parasites only on the interest earned off of the backs of their
laborers, to whom they pay wages of debt and make loans of interest in return for their rendered
service (voluntary servitude/slavery). In turn, those wages go to pay the rent of government agents
acting as licensed landlords, grocers, and monopolists. And this is labeled in the legal realm as that
which is a fair and equitable system. The feudal system may have changed, but we, the feudal
tenants and our family of land-lords never did.

SALARIUM - Latin. In the civil law. An allowance of provisions. A stipend, wages, or

compensation for service. An annual allowance or compensation. (Black1)

SALARY - A recompense or consideration made to a person for his PAINS AND INDUSTRY
IN ANOTHER PERSON'S BUSINESS; also WAGES, stipend, or annual allowance. An
annual compensation for services rendered; a Þxed sum to be paid by the year for services.
"Salary" signiÞes the periodical compensation to men in ofÞcial and some other situations.
The word is derived from "salarium," which is from the word "sal," SALT, that being AN
ARTICLE IN WHICH THE ROMAN SOLDIERS WERE PAID. (Black1)

EMPLOY - To engage in one's service; to USE as an AGENT or SUBSTITUTE in transacting

business; to commission and intrust with the management of one's affairs; and, when used
in respect to a SERVANT or HIRED LABORER, the term is equivalent to HIRING, which
implies A REQUEST AND A CONTRACT for a compensation, and has but this one
meaning when used in the ordinary affairs and business of life. (Black1)

EMPLOYEE - ÉThe word is more extensive than "clerk" or "ofÞcer." It signiÞes ANY ONE IN
PLACE, OR HAVING CHARGE OR USING A FUNCTION, as well as ONE IN OFFICE.
(Black1)

EMPLOYED - This signiÞes both THE ACT OF DOING A THING and the BEING UNDER
CONTRACT OR ORDERS TO DO IT. (Black1)

EMPLOYMENT - This word does not necessarily import an engagement or rendering

services for another. A PERSON may as well be "employed" about HIS OWN BUSINESS as
in the transaction of the same FOR A PRINCIPAL. (Black1)

JOBBER - One who buys and sells goods FOR OTHERS; one who buys or sells on the stock
exchange; a dealer in stocks, shares, or securities. One who buys and sells articles in bulk and
resells them to dealers. A merchant buying and selling in job lots. A SORT OF
MIDDLEMAN. (Black4)

ENGAGEMENT - In French law. A contract. The obligation arising from a quasi contract.
The terms "obligation" and "engagement" are said to be synonymous, but the Code seems
specially to apply the term "engagement" to THOSE OBLIGATIONS WHICH THE LAW
IMPOSES ON A MAN WITHOUT THE INTERVENTION OF ANY CONTRACT, either on
the part of the obligor or the obligee. An engagement to do or omit to do something amounts
to A PROMISE. In English Practice. The term has been appropriated to denote A
CONTRACT entered into by a married woman WITH THE INTENTION OF BINDING OR
CHARGING HER SEPARATE ESTATE, or, with stricter accuracy, a promise which in the
case of a person sui juris would be A CONTRACT, but in the case of a married woman is
not a contract, because she cannot bind herself personally, even in equity. Her engagements,
therefore, merely operate as dispositions or appointments pro tanto of her separate estate.
(Black1)

SALIC LAW - A body of law framed by the Salian Franks, a Teutonic race who settled in Gaul
about the beginning of the Þfth century. It is the most ancient of the barbarian Codes. It is
said to have been compiled about the year 420. It embraced the laws and customs of the Salian

!1109
 Franks. It is of great historical value, in connection with THE ORIGINS OF FEUDALISM
and similar subjects. Its most celebrated provision was one which excluded women from the
inheritance of landed estates, by an extension of which law females were always excluded
from succession to the crown of France. Hence this provision, by itself, is often referred to as
the “Salic Law.” In French jurisprudence. The name is frequently applied to that fundamental
law of France which excluded females from succession to the crown. Supposed to have been
derived from the sixty-second title of the Salic Law, “De Alode.” (Black4)

—=—

You might say that getting a job is like getting married. The male’s and the female’s persons
incorporate their Þctional estates (their Þctions/surnames) in contract and become one corporate
body politic, one corporation. And as the male counterpart well knows, the female estate generally
takes everything that the male estate holder owns when the contract of marriage is broken in
divorce. This is of course due to the illegitimacy of the public, legal marriage. Legal marriage is not,
in any way, based upon or inconformity to the Natural Law. Therefore no man (male) should
expect any True equitableness in a purely for-proÞt divorce court. It is in the best interest of the
state to take all property of that estate away from the male, as the head of the family corporation,
feudally speaking. For no equitableness is involved in such mean and low proceedings run by
those devilÕs advocates of the Bar Association. This is to say that no man (male or female) can
equitably take another’s actual, lawful property under the Natural Law. But a man in public
persona (property of another) holds nothing of his own and is bound under the eminent domain
and dominion of his master, and so all is up for grabs. The legal vultures, the attorneys, seduce the
legalistic, public-minded wo-man into committing as much pain and legal theft as possible against
that which she vowed to love and protect. For the attorney cares for nothing except his billable
hours. The attorney is strictly stuck in the artiÞcial time domain, the realm of Þction. What happens
to Reality, including the ruination of a man and his family, is irrelevant to the agents (attorneys) of
Þction.

The word retirement, when applied to the employee that was being used like a slave for his labor,
literally means to put to death (exterminate) the corporate bond and contract to that Þctional
person that executed its obligation. The man was never actually employed, only the Þctional name
of the man. Man is mere surety for the ad-mixed legal name in contract, ensuring the name delivers
its contractual obligations.

And yet at the end of their Lives these good, agenticly acting sons of the nation have nothing of
their own; holding merely paper title of the property they purchased (with debt) but do not own.
For nothing can be bought with debt, only borrowed, rented, and leased in tenancy. These men,
without comprehension, never actually worked a day in their Lives. They instead inhabited
government property and as surety for titled strawmen were trafÞcked for their labor. The man
never earned a True Living, for he was acting in spiritual death, and so never Lived while earning
and never earned for his actual Self. He was dead the whole time. He never purchased a home, for
he did so in the name of government’s citizen-ship utilizing government debt script in mort-gage
(dead pledge). He registered his bank account, registered his car, and registered his children in a
name that wasnÕt his, in mortmain (dead hands); all of these things rendered and patented only
under Caesar. And so while the memory of hard days at work Þll his dreams and ache in his bones,
in Reality he never worked for his True Self. The man was induced into the modern version of
indentured servitude through peonage; a strange voluntary sort of slavery that most never con-
template even as they volunteer and are paid under it. And so after 50 years of labor, the man has
nothing to show for it except a few papers that say he is a Þctional tenant in governmentÕs
registered property. And without comprehension, he ensured that his children would follow the
same course when he unknowingly signed and de-livered them over to the state at “birth.” And
Þnally, the man dies without any actual thing that is his to show or to bequeath to his children, for
his only prize is an invisible serf’s collar.

WebsterÕs 1828 expands on this Reality:

!1110
 EMPLOY - verb transitive - [Latin plico.] 1. TO OCCUPY THE TIME, attention and labor of;
TO KEEP busy, or at work; TO USE. We employ our hands in labor; we employ our heads or
faculties in study or thought; the attention is employed, when the mind is Þxed or occupied
upon an object; we employ time, when we devote it to an object. A portion of time should be
daily employed in reading the scriptures, meditation and prayer; a great portion of life is
employed to little proÞt or TO VERY BAD PURPOSES. 2. TO USE AS AN INSTRUMENT
OR MEANS. We employ pens in writing, and arithmetic in keeping accounts. We employ
medicines in curing diseases. 3. TO USE AS MATERIALS in forming any thing. We employ
timber, stones or bricks, in building; we employ wool, linen and cotton, in making cloth. 4. TO
ENGAGE IN ONE'S SERVICE; TO USE AS AN AGENT or substitute in transacting
business; to commission and entrust with the management of one's affairs. The president
employed an envoy to negotiate a treaty. Kings and States employ embassadors at foreign
courts. 5. TO OCCUPY; TO USE; to apply or devote to an object; to pass in business; as, TO
EMPLOY TIME; to employ an hour, a day or a week; TO EMPLOY ONE'S LIFE. To employ
one's self, is to apply or devote one's time and attention; to busy one's self. - noun - That
which engages the mind, or occupies the time and labor of a PERSON; business; object of
study or industry; employment. Present to grasp, and future still to Þnd. The whole employ of
body and of mind. 1. Occupation, as ART, MYSTERY, trade, profession. 2. PUBLIC OFFICE;
AGENCY; SERVICE FOR ANOTHER. (Webs1828)

—=—

Busi-ness.

Busy-ness.

The 8-16 hour work day…

When can a man possibly Þnd time to have a spiritual Life, to study the works of history and of the
slave races existing before him, to read with contemplation and due diligence the scriptures, the
sciences, the philosophies, or the law that binds him, to learn new things in order to improve his
actual Livelihood, or to even learn his own disposition as a debt-slave? The typical man employed
(used) in busi-ness has been compelled instead to get his spiritual ad-vice from a corporate church
sponsored and licensed by the legal state, his knowledge earned and paid for from a completely
corrupted, government-funded school, and to judge his own opinion of himself by how good he is
at being used (employed) — by how many hours he can work for someone else with no actual
reward except a paper currency that has unlimited regeneration because it merely represents the
debt and obligation of all other employed and unemployed citizenships and their titles of
“property” held by the nation.

The employer keeps the substance of the Real while the employee accepts the Þctional form of his
own indebtedness as payment, for the money only represents his own indenture. His time is used,
and he is paid in the artiÞcial valuation of the currency of time, called as money.

If this is not the perfect template for a voluntary slave society I don’t know what is.

And this brings us to the end of another chapter. Not, coincidentally, merely a chapter of this work,
but of our very Lives. For here we Þnd ourselves with the knowledge of what has been done to us
through trickery and word-magic. We cannot simply forget this knowledge. And so, though this
work goes on in future volumes, the question unanswered seems to be what is the next chapter in
each of our own Lives?

Exit the legal, public matrixÉ or plug right back in?

And the moral of this story?

!1111
We’ve all been cheated. Escheated. Governments and systems of religious and legal law are
designed only to protect the cheaters, the inter-national round table of the monopoly board. And
only our re-birth (re-turn) back into our Source, a homecoming back into God’s Realm of Nature
and Law can save us from our Þctional, re-presented selves in persona.

We are stuck in an illusion, a simulation of our True Self.

The pirates rule the virtual, commercial sea.

The legal matrix has us…

But wait a minuteÉ You didnÕt think the author wouldnÕt provide the deÞnition of a pirate before
we depart, did you? After all, the looters must be shown for what they are:

—=—

“The real looting in this country takes place in the transfer of the wealth
from the poor to the rich… and the poor have been systematically looted
in this country. The rich have been made richer under this criminal,
fascist president and his government.”
—George Carlin

—=—

For you see, a single pirate acting alone without license is merely an unauthorized, illegal pirate.
But two or more pirates that unite together in their criminal intent is a con-spiracy, a combination,
a confederacy, and yes, a nation. But it is not merely the foundational union of these private,
privateering pirates in compact of nationhood that creates the piracy. It is what the nation creates in
and of itself that is the pirate cove, a shelter and den for legalized thievery. A law that allows what
is unlawful is no law at all, merely a Þction of legalese. Only congress as the lawmakers may decide
what constitutes piracy. For they also deÞne what a lawbreaker is, and it is never themselves or
their bloodline. In other words, the pirates themselves decide what piracy is and is not. For the
conspirators can commit no conspiracy against themselves. By Talmudic law, it is only when a
pretended “Jew” of the synagogue of satan harms another false “Jew” that he breaks the law. The
gentiles, as cattle, cannot be harmed, for we are acting as (surety for) voluntary property. And this
is the moral compass of all commercial governments. It has to be. It is the law of nations, which is
only invoked when one nation harms another, not when any nation harms its own property
(persons). Remember, nations are persons too!

And so, as with all crimes, the word piracy is barred from being used to describe government, for
its acts of piracy fall under the Þction of Òby lawful authority,Ó as it has in all kingdoms and under
all kings of old. As with conspiracy, piracy when legally deÞned is only that which is against
government, not whatÕs taken on its behalf. Stealing children by birth certiÞcation is perfectly legal.

PIRACY - ROBBERY AND DEPREDATION UPON THE HIGH SEAS. Robbery and forcible
depredation upon the high sea, animo furandi. Robbery or forcible depredation on the high
seas, WITHOUT LAWFUL AUTHORITY, done animo furandi, AND IN THE SPIRIT AND
INTENTION OF UNIVERSAL HOSTILITY. (WCA1889)

PIRATE - One who roves the sea in an ARMED VESSEL, without commission from any
sovereign State, on his own authority, AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEIZING BY FORCE,
AND APPROPRIATING TO HIMSELF, WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION, EVERY VESSEL
HE MAY MEET. (WCA1889)

!1112
PIRATICAL - adjective - [Latin piraticus.] Robbing or plundering by open violence ON THE
HIGH SEAS; as a piratical commander or ship. 1. Consisting in piracy; PREDATORY;
ROBBING; AS A PIRATICAL TRADE OR OCCUPATION. 2. PRACTICING LITERARY
THEFT. The errors of the press were multiplied by piratical printers. (Webs1828)

LITERARY - adjective - [Latin literarius.] 1. Pertaining to letters or literature; RESPECTING

LEARNING OR LEARNED MEN; as a literary history; LITERARY CONVERSATION. 2.
Derived from erudition; as literary fame. 3. Furnished with erudition; versed in letters; as a
literary man. 4. CONSISTING IN LETTERS, or written or printed compositions; as literary
property. (Webs1828)

PIRATICAL - Imports an aggression unauthorized by the law of nations, hostile in

character, wanton and criminal in its commission, AND UTTERLY WITHOUT SANCTION
FROM ANY PUBLIC AUTHORITY OR SOVEREIGN POWER, that the act belongs to the
class of offenses which pirates are in the habit of perpetrating, whether the purpose be
plunder, hatred, revenge, or wanton abuse of power. HOSTILITIES COMMITTED UNDER
A COMMISSION FROM A PARTY TO A RECOGNIZED WAR ARE NOT INCLUDED. In
that case the superior may be held for the act. PIRACY IS THE SAME OFFENSE AT SEA AS
ROBBERY ON LAND. It is everywhere punished with death; at common law was punished
as an offense against the law of nations (part of the common law) — the universal law of
society: A PIRATE BEING DEEMED AN ENEMY OF HIS RACE, hostis humani generis.
Congress shall have power "TO DEFINE AND PUNISH Piracies and Felonies committed on
the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations.Ó "To deÞne" is to enumerate the
crimes which will constitute piracy. 2. Infringement of a copyright by reprinting all or a
substantial portion of the production, word for word; or, by imitating or copying it with
colorable alterations. Citing the most important parts of a copyrighted work, with a view not
to criticism but to supersede the use of the original work and to substitute the review. In
determining the question of piracy, quantity, quality and value are regarded. If these elections
are made animo furandi, with intent to make use of them for the purpose for which the
original author used them, to convey in a different publication the information he imparted,
OR TO SUPPLANT HIM IN HIS OWN TERRITORY, a small quantity will sufÞce to support
the charge. If the pirated portion, being substantial, cannot be separated from the original
matter without destroying the publication, the whole book will be enjoined upon the principle
of the doctrine of “confusion of goods.” See Abridge; Compile; Review. (WCA1889)

CON - Preposition - WITH. A preÞx meaning with, TOGETHER. Webster. - Adjective - A slang
or cant abbreviation for CONFIDENCE, as a CON MAN or a CON GAME. Webster. (Black4)

CONSPIRACY - In criminal law. A combination or CONFEDERACY between two or more

persons formed for the purpose of committing, BY THEIR JOINT EFFORTS, some unlawful
or criminal act, or some act which is innocent in itself, BUT BECOMES UNLAWFUL WHEN
DONE BY THE CONCERTED ACTION OF THE CONSPIRATORS, OR FOR THE
PURPOSE OF USING CRIMINAL OR UNLAWFUL MEANS TO THE COMMISSION OF
AN ACT NOT IN ITSELF UNLAWFUL. A combination, or an agreement between two or
more persons, for accomplishing an unlawful end OR A LAWFUL END BY UNLAWFUL
MEANS. A partnership in criminal purposes. The essence of "conspiracy" is an agreement,
together with an overt act, to do an unlawful act, OR DO A LAWFUL ACT IN AN
UNLAWFUL MANNER. Mere knowledge, acquiescence, approval, or attempt on part of one
to perpetuate illegal act is insufÞcient. A CONSPIRACY MAY BE A CONTINUING ONE;
ACTORS MAY DROP OUT, AND OTHERS DROP IN; THE DETAILS OF OPERATION
MAY CHANGE FROM TIME TO TIME; THE MEMBERS NEED NOT KNOW EACH
OTHER OR THE PART PLAYED BY OTHERS; a member need not know all the details of
the plan or the operations; he must, however, know the purpose of the conspiracy and agree
to become a party to a plan to effectuate that purpose. A consultation or agreement between
two or more persons, either falsely to accuse another of a crime punishable by law; or

!1113
 wrongfully TO INJURE OR PREJUDICE A THIRD PERSON, OR ANY BODY OF MEN, IN
ANY MANNER; or to commit any offense punishable by law; or to do any act with intent to
prevent the course of justice; or to effect a legal purpose with a corrupt intent, or by improper
means. (Black4)

CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CONSPIRACIES - The term "civil" is used to designate a conspiracy
which will furnish ground for a civil action, as where, in carrying out the design of the
conspirators, OVERT ACTS ARE DONE CAUSING LEGAL DAMAGE, THE PERSON
INJURED HAS A RIGHT OF ACTION. It is said that the gist of civil conspiracy IS THE
INJURY OR DAMAGE. While criminal conspiracy does not require such overt acts, yet, so
far as the rights and remedies are concerned, all criminal conspiracies are embraced within
the civil conspiracies. ACCURATELY SPEAKING, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A
CIVIL ACTION FOR CONSPIRACY. The better view is that THE DAMAGE SUSTAINED,
AND NOT THE CONSPIRACY IS THE GIST OF THE ACTION. The combination may be of
no consequence except as bearing upon rules of evidence or the persons liable. The essence
of a "civil conspiracy" is A CONCERT OR COMBINATION TO DEFRAUD OR CAUSE
OTHER INJURY TO PERSON OR PROPERTY, which results in damage to the person or
property of plaintiff. (Black4)

—=—

And so the congress, as that which is at common law a legally lawful body (per the Þctional law of
nations), is the only decider as to what is a conspiracy. For the law of nations is only concerned
with how nation treats nation, not how a nation treats its voluntarily contracted subjects (willing
slaves). No law can protect a man who volunteers to his own tyranny, pain, and deceit. And so let
us not forget the de facto nature of the other hat of Congress, that which is called as “congress” in
name and title (US Code) only. When congress stands as both the creator and the lawmaker of the
very pirate cove of the United States, and when that pirate cove only applies to those voluntarily
subjected to it under civil contract within its district (seizure) and as dead objects of a declared war
or emergency, then what possible force in this world can possibly sink such a ßeet? What power
can possibly defeat such a combination of men in cons-piracy to defraud and corrupt all others?

Well, how can we answer these questions until we Þrst acknowledge the organized crime racket
that is the de facto (illegitimate) national government, until we Þrst admit that we have been
severely duped, dwelled by patriotic nonsense while being openly and willingly robbed blind?

RACKET - Engaging in an operation to make money illegitimately, implying continuity of

behavior. (Black4)

RACKETEER - A person who makes money by violations of the Penal Law. Particularly
those violations accompanied by violence. (Black4)

RACKETEERING - An organized conspiracy to commit the crimes of extortion or coercion,

or attempts to commit extortion or coercion. From the standpoint of extortion, it is the
obtaining of money or property from another, with his consent, induced by the wrongful
use of force or fear. The fear which constitutes the legally necessary element in extortion is
induced by oral or written threats to do an unlawful injury to the property of the threatened
person by means of explosives, Þre, or otherwise; and to kill, KIDNAP, OR INJURE HIM
OR A RELATIVE OF HIS OR SOME MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY. From the standpoint of
coercion, it usually takes the form of compelling by use of similar threats to person or
property a person to do or abstain from doing an act which such other person has the legal
right to do or abstain from doing, SUCH AS JOINING A SO-CALLED PROTECTIVE
ASSOCIATION TO PROTECT HIS RIGHT TO CONDUCT A BUSINESS OR TRADE.
(Black4)

—=—

!1114
Now, would you say that after reading US Code,Title 42, Section 1981, that the IRS and every
government agency supporting it is in the business of legalized racketeering? I remind you that, as
US code states, it is your strawman’s “equal right” to be “EXACTED” from, meaning EXTORTED.

But, you see, they aren’t extorting us as men, they are extorting their own property, their own
persons. They can “charge” whatever they wish to their own debt-carrying vessels, and the agent in
surety, whom voluntarily continues in his usage of that property (person-hood, citizen-ship) must
pay the price of his sin for his usage of the artiÞcial protections in licensed anarchy against the
Natural Law of God. It’s quite a racket, amazingly awful in its evil design if I don’t say so myself.

And yet it comes straight out of the Bible… for those who have purposefully, inversely
implemented it, are a cursed people that deny the New Law and Testament of Jesus christ (the
Word/Son of God). They read the following passage with greed and ill intent, not with the Love
and Charity required. For this is not just an instruction guide for pirates, it is a prophecy for the
common masses of goyim, and it has all but come True. It’s exactly what needs to happen today.

—=—

“Then ye shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you,
AND DESTROY ALL THEIR PICTURES, AND DESTROY ALL THEIR
MOLTEN IMAGES, AND QUITE PLUCK DOWN ALL THEIR HIGH
PLACES: AND YE SHALL DISPOSSESS THE INHABITANTS OF THE
LAND, AND DWELL THEREIN: for I have given you the land to
possess it. AND YE SHALL DIVIDE THE LAND BY LOT FOR AN
INHERITANCE AMONG YOUR FAMILIES: AND TO THE MORE YE
SHALL GIVE THE MORE INHERITANCE, and to the fewer ye shall
give the less inheritance: EVERY MAN'S INHERITANCE SHALL BE IN
THE PLACE WHERE HIS LOT FALLETH; ACCORDING TO THE
TRIBES OF YOUR FATHERS YE SHALL INHERIT. BUT IF YE WILL
NOT DRIVE OUT THE INHABITANTS OF THE LAND FROM
BEFORE YOU; THEN IT SHALL COME TO PASS, THAT THOSE
WHICH YE LET REMAIN OF THEM SHALL BE PRICKS IN YOUR
EYES, AND THORNS IN YOUR SIDES, AND SHALL VEX YOU IN
THE LAND WHEREIN YE DWELL. Moreover it shall come to pass, that
I shall do unto you, as I thought to do unto them.”
—Numbers 33: 52-56, KJB

—=—

Our eyes have been pricked and our sides have received thorns, and the land wherein we have
become such fruitless dwellers has bee pirated away through the magically worded legal terms of
art we have herein discussed. It is the multitude that have been dispossessed from the land, for we
worship all that we should not — the pictures, molten images, and high places of the pirate cove of
every nation and district around the world.

The point here is that if you keep volunteering to use and appear in their person, you have no
private or public right to complain, for you necessarily in your usage of another’s property consent
to Title 42, Section 1981, and all other laws regarding persons (rented ships). In other words, as they

!1115
say, ignorance of this law is no excuse, and purposeful ignorance is just downright lame. You will
be extorted and exacted by the chancery and community chest (treasury) — do not pass Go, and do
not collect $200. You will pay for your choice and your election will be made painfully sure.

—=—

“The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they
have been VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED BY THE CITIZENSHIP
TO AGENCIES OF GOVERNMENT.”
—City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944

—=—

We now have the knowledge, as revealed again within this work; a work designed only to dis-
cover the Light and dark works of others, to reverse their spells and pull the curtain on their fragile
illusion and devilish matrix code. We now know that this pirate cove exists only as long as we
voluntarily serve it as its proprietary agents and believe in (falsely love) its authority to rule over us
in Þction. We now know that the only power and authority that stands above that system and its
ßatteringly titled gods in a corporation of self-declared legal sovereignty is the ambiguous Nature of
Truth in God Almighty. And we now know without question the purpose and power of that
Highest Law of God and how to achieve Its very Real solution and only True redemption as the
end of all contractual relation-ships upon that artiÞcial sea created and governed by these pirates.

But who will step up to walk upon this path as christ’s example has shown us?

The story of our lives will depend on the answer to that very question.

My journey, my path, and this discovery of Truth has just begun. May we Þnd the strength of will
to help each other to Þnd this path togetherÉ


!1116
 —=—
Epilogue:

On Sovereignty 

And Allodial Title
—=—

—=—

“But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they
which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles EXERCISE LORDSHIP
OVER THEM; AND THEIR GREAT ONES EXERCISE AUTHORITY
UPON THEM. BUT SO SHALL IT NOT BE AMONG YOU: but
whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: AND
WHOSOEVER OF YOU WILL BE THE CHIEFEST, SHALL BE
SERVANT OF ALL.”
—Mark 10:42, KJB

—=—

“And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles EXERCISE

LORDSHIP OVER THEM; AND THEY THAT EXERCISE AUTHORITY
UPON THEM ARE CALLED BENEFACTORS. BUT YE SHALL NOT BE
SO: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; AND
HE THAT IS CHIEF, AS HE THAT DOTH SERVE… And I appoint unto
you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;”


—Luke 22: 25-26, 29, KJB

—=—

These verses tell us that as gentiles, as the common “public” persons of the multitude of goyim
borne (carried) by the nation and that call the nation our father, that we shall be under the lordship
of some form of “kings” (false gods). It tells us that those private, god-like People sharing in their
own kingship as incorporated, militarized landholders shall exercise authority over the lands and
over that landless multitude we are. It tells us that they are the “great ones” ruling by their

!1117
supposed, self-proclaimed (positive/legal/ecclesiastical) sovereignty as the “benefactors.” Many a
researcher and groups thereof have sought out this tantalizing title of ßattery in that legal realm,
seeking to somehow become the master (private citizen of a State) instead of the servant (national,
public citizen-ship) by Þling boundless legal paperworks, as if that is anywhere close to what christ
teaches will redeem us. The problem I keep coming back to hinges on the fact that every aspect of
the Bible warns us against our voluntary, purposeful participation in such Þctional ÒkingdomsÓ
and respect of their idolatrous gods, and that the True Kingdom of God in christ is not made of the
artiÞces, buildings, and laws of man, nor built through such Masonic hands. We see it written over
and over that the most mighty and kingly among us should be content to be relegated to the
lowliest of occupations so as to serve others before oneself and to minister the Word without gains
or proÞts, which of course fulÞlls the Highest Law, so that none should be wealthy before all others
are Þrst so. And yet to become a landholder, to fulÞll the constituted purpose of those false, legal
“fathers” of this United States and soon the United Nations’ global beast system goes against all of
that scriptural knowledge. It requires a mark, a blemish, signs and tokens, a false name and a
ßattering title. And so I shall end this Þrst volume within the clockworks of this very conundrum.

With the vast amount of information and piracy we have already uncovered, and in consideration
that much more backing evidence is on its way with Volume II, I feel it’s my responsibility as the
author of this work to end here with a warning, one similar to what I offered in the beginning of
this work regarding a certain curse surrounding the Bible, depending on the intent of each reader.
In one’s search for further enlightenment and possible action, one will certainly run across many
self-proclaimed gurus and snake oil salesmen attempting to cause one to purchase their special,
magical paperwork, their unproven methods, their legal dockets and court cases, etcÉ And they
will do so at what are often outrageous prices attached to such outrageous, unveriÞable claims.
Like used car salesmen, they will promise that with a few magic words sent to government with
red and blue ink and a special symbol or seal that you too can be like them, though you will never
actually meet them or verify their delusional claims of success. For there is one litmus test that
these gurus will never pass, ironically, which is to show that their cases are private in nature. The
reason they can be found publicized, in other words, is because they have not accomplished the
feat of becoming private citizens of any State or Land (territory), and therefore their cases are
published in the administrative nature they exist, as public documents for public persons within
United States (national) courts. If they are in a public court, they are public persons. And it is
doubtful that any private landlord will lift a Þnger to cause the treasure of his mystery, his privacy,
to be revealed. Therefore, these gurus continue to reside in the public domain. This is a dead
giveaway. Pun intended. One is a fool to take advice from the spiritually dead while seeking True
Life. The blind should not seek out the blind to seeÉ

It has become a hobby of mine to ask most people that are pursuing such legal ends, to somehow
impossibly solve spiritual problems through unspiritually legal, artful (evil) means, just exactly
which example are they following? Whose is the success story they seek to emulate? Whom is it
that overcame? WhoÕs person was cruciÞed so that the spiritual man could rise again? Who out
there is what they say they are, when you know always and in self-evident Truth that no man is
some-thing, and can in Truth be no-thing, unless he taketh upon his ßesh the mark and titles of
manÕs Þction?


As for me, I am just as you are, a seeker of answers to seemingly unlimited and often, on the
surface, unanswerable questions. I am not a winner or a guru, and I have no path to offer you
except that of the already Existing and self-evident model of christ under the Natural Law. I offer
no remedy, no monetary gain or reward; only this small parcel of knowledge given freely within
these private works.



The point is that after receiving such information, I do not wish for you to place your trust and
your well-being in the alternative, patriot, and so-called “truth” movements out there any more
than I would ask you to trust in myself. For the scriptures warn us never to put our faith in any
man. None of these things, these paperworks, are self-evident, and there is very little useful
information to be found. Much artful truth about the paradoxical reality of Þction abounds, and itÕs

!1118
certainly easy to lose oneself within the fruit of that conceptual tree. There are many attempts and
many failures on record and off, just as there are so many self-aggrandizing perspectives and
misguided intentions. Perhaps it is fair to say that most of these self-proclaimed “experts” come
from good intentions, though as the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Or is
that the road to Rome? As to our Spirits, we must not let this fact bring us down, and instead learn
in earnest and humility from their mistakes. The best way of doing this is in the reading of their
dismissed and often laughable court cases and registrar submissions (i.e., paperwork), which gives
us an idea of how completely unviable some of these false legalistic idealisms of patriot mythology
will be treated at bar if we should attempt to ourselves follow on such a deviated, delusional path.

There are, sadly, a whole lot of slaves preaching and recreating their own deluded self-image as
masters, and leading others to do the same, even while choking on and returning to their own
conceit and vomit as the proverbs parabolically predict. Do not suffer these fools. Learn from them.
If their claim to you is a legal or commercial solution and redemption of any kind, you know you
are dealing with one who does not know the Highest foundation of Law. If money is their goal for
you, as reparations, reward, or remedy, then you will never gain anything but debt in the form of
an IOU, as a further inducement to your own love (belief) in that root of all evil, where mammon is
your god and purchaser. If evil (money) be what you seek as remedy, then you deserve what you
will get, as the perfect model of Huxley’s Brave New World citizen quite happy and brainwashed
in his own servitude. For you can only spend that money in the company store, in the nation
(jurisdiction) that creates it, even when utilizing that currency's private capacity as legal tender.

But the agents are always watching, and every retailer and private seller is a potential agent and
farmer of men (tax collector). It’s the company (national) rule! That money will remain the property
of government while in your person’s hands, and proprietary strings and tribute are always
attached to such commercial tools of mammon. To be clear, a reward in money keeps you in the
system, for with-out that matrix system (outside its jurisdiction) that money is useless and carries
no value (no belief/love), just as the cartoon only has Þctional life inside of that electric magic
mirror. Its value is simply not a Reality, not self-Existent or self-evident. Money has no place in
Nature, and is of no use to a spiritually aware man of God. To be a user of money is to worship its
god, plain and simple. The use of money carries with it an implied contract and law, and the creator
controls. Remember, the devil controls man only through contract, through proprietary words,
symbols, and numbers written with legal (anti-God) intent. And national currency carries a
presumption of con-tract under law for its use by any man, both public and private.

As a telling example of such applied and misguided mythology from the shock-jocks, dreamers,
and pontiÞcators of the truth/liberty/patriot/sovereignty movement repeated time and time again, I
turn now to a letter that was written to Cecile Bledsoe, a State representative of Arkansas, which
was subsequently forwarded and responded to by the Attorney General of Arkansas and others,
and Þnally publicly posted on that governmentÕs website for the public record. A citation for the
web address is included here strictly for source accreditation as an ofÞcial (.gov) website of the
Attorney General (AG). (http://ag.arkansas.gov/opinions/docs/2002-296.html)

Here we have the perfect example of how the law of man is twisted and wrongly transliterated so
as to Þt into the always limited perspective of he who seeks that which he is not privy to, be it due
to one’s status or simply to one’s grand delusions of romanticized privilege. This also shows the
extreme danger of quoting parts of the whole of any other court case, especially when those cases
have nothing to do with the current one at bar. Always remember that a part does not equal the
whole, and that the utilization of quotes must be understood and representative of one’s own case
or subject-matter in every way. For every case is new in the eyes of the administrator (judge), and
every case has the potential for new quotes, which are often only opinion to support fact.
Remember too that the dissenting opinion of cases is just as valid as the supporting opinions.

The following is a great learning tool, showing us how the legal mind of these elitist Attorney’s
think as opposed to the typical public-minded goyim, whom simply refuses to comprehend any
legal truth or spiritual Truth that opposes his own world view. Perspective is everything…

!1119
This vulgar inquiry was initiated and answered as such (original inquiring author’s name omitted
herein), where we Þnd that the Attorney General is answering said inquiry as sent to
Representative Bledsoe from a public-minded US Citizen-ship with what on the surface he believes
are good and liberty-minded intentions, the pannage of we the useful innocents…

Begin Excerpt:

Dear Representative Bledsoe:

I am writing in response to your request for my opinion on the following questions:

Can property be taxed if the land patent is current?

Are the following opinions correct?

Article 2, Section 28 of the Arkansas state Constitution provides: ÒAll lands IN THIS STATE
are declared to be ALLODIAL; AND FEUDAL TENURES of every description, with all their
incidents, ARE PROHIBITED.”

I HEREBY REASSERT ALL MY RIGHTS UNDER SAID PROVISION. I AM NOT A

TENANT. Please note the following:

ÒAllodialÓ means not beholden to any superior. Black’s Law Dictionary.

Unrestricted allodial property is not subject to LOCAL taxation. U.S. v. City of Kodiak, 132
F.Supp. 574 (1955).

ÒThat THE PATENT CARRIES THE FEE and is THE BEST TITLE KNOWN TO A COURT
OF LAW is the settled doctrine of the court.” —Marshall v. Ladd, 74 U.S. 106.

ÒA PATENT is the HIGHEST EVIDENCE OF TITLE, and is conclusive, against the

government and all claiming under junior titles, until it is set aside or annulled by some
judicial tribunal.” —Stone v. U.S., 67 U.S. 765.

ÒISSUANCE OF A GOVERNMENT PATENT GRANTING TITLE TO LAND is ‘the most

accredited type of CONVEYANCE know[n] to our law.[‘]” U.S. v. Creek Nation, 295 U.S.
103-111. See also U.S. v. Cherokee Nation, 474 F2d 628, 634.

A PATENT ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES so vests the title in the lands covered
thereby, that it is the further general rule that, such patents are not open to collateral attack.
Thomas v. Union PaciÞc Railroad Company (1956). (See also State v. Crawford, 475 P.2d 515 (Ariz.
App. 1970. A patent is PRIMA FACIE VALID, and if its validity can be attacked at all, the
burden of proof is upon the party seeking to upset the patent.)

See State v. Crawford, 441 P.2d 586, 590 (Ariz. App. 1968) (A patent to land is the highest
evidence of title and may not be collaterally attacked).

In Hooper et al. v. Scheimer, 64 U.S. (23 How.) 235 (1859), the United States Supreme Court stated,
ÒI afÞrm that A PATENT IS UNIMPEACHABLE AT LAW, EXCEPT, PERHAPS, WHEN IT
APPEARS ON ITS OWN FACE TO BE VOID; and the authorities on this point are so
uniform and unbroken in the courts, Federal and State, that little else will be necessary
beyond a reference to them.” Id. at 240 (1859).

Courts of equity cannot set aside, annul, or correct patents or other evidence of title
OBTAINED FROM THE UNITED STATES by fraud or mistake, unless on speciÞc averment
of the MISTAKE OR FRAUD, SUPPORTED BY CLEAR AND SATISFACTORY PROOF.
Maxelli Land Grant Cancellation, 11 How. (U.S. 552 (1850).

!1120
 A collateral attack to a land patent must be brought in the original land patent proceedings.
Sumna Corporation v. California ex rel. State Lands Commission, etc., 80 L.Ed.2d 237 (1984).

CONCLUSION: LAND CANNOT BE TAXED IF A LAND PATENT IS CURRENT.

—=—

End Excerpt.

To be clear, this is the fallacious conclusion of he who wrote this inquiry letter for clariÞcation, who
has been inßuenced by non-attorney gurus that sell their ÒmethodsÓ and worthless reams of
publicly available (free) paperwork as if theyÕre claims are legitimate and stand as legal precedent.



Now that the goyim has stated his opinion on the way he believes things should be, as opposed to
the way they are, to the Attorney General addressed as an ofÞcial representative agent and ofÞcer
of the United States and of the State, he has set out an opinion based on the idea that land cannot
be taxed if it is under a legitimate, US granted land patent, and that such patents may be magically
created by subjects (public citizen-ships). He has also confused the words Allodial and patent to
mean the same thing. To further support this unprecedented opinion, various snippets of many
mismatching court cases and opinions are quoted very much out of context to this inquiry, and is
obviously done so without under-standing or comprehension of the private nature of this pirate
cove of qualiÞed landholders in posterity and their created, corporate governments that prevent
goyim like this from ever holding the private lands of the private People (States). In other words,
we have a public person (voluntary slave) standing only in and from the perspective of a publicly
educated, commercialized citizen-ship (a pseudo-feudal tenant) of the United States attempting to
obtain the rights and privies of a private citizen (the masters of his person/status).

Most cases are lost or dismissed simply because of this black hole of misunderstanding, as the
difference between public and private and between private State citizens and national citizen-ships.
And of course we see that this inquiry has everything to do with debt and money, as it always
does. In this case, money in the form of taxation is on the stand, where a hopeful peon seeks to
bypass the very constitutional right of each States (People) to tax ALL property, private and public.
For only the State hold land in Allodium, never the individual citizen.

Hilariously, this inquiry quoted the very code that defeats his opinion, which states again that,
ÒAll lands IN THIS STATE are declared to be ALLODIAL; AND FEUDAL TENURES of every
description, with all their incidents, ARE PROHIBITED.Ó

Translation: all lands are in this State, and thus the State holds all lands as Allodial, as the highest
status possible. This is to say that because Allodial title is equivalent to a feudal tenure, no private
citizen of any State is allowed to hold Allodial title. This is prohibited. However, the private citizens
can be granted land patents (perfection of title) as a subordinate title to the State (principal), which
takes away the power of feudal tenure but leaves the private rights of landholders. In other words,
only the State is a feudal landlord, and it grants secondary, revokable patent rights to its citizens
under the private law of the State. The State is a corporation, not a man, and not many men. The
State, and therefore the ÒPeople,Ó is a Þctional sovereignty as an artiÞcial person (body politic).
Note that this mentions nothing about public persons at all, because US citizenships are not able to
hold patent to land, let alone set foot upon it without license by the feudal State and its United
States joint-holding company for human capital (publicly, commercially borne/carried persons).

One other thing to consider here, as one of the most common mistakes made in such cases, is that
the public person making this inquiry attempts to alter its own status under public citizen-ship by
declaring that ÒI am not a tenant.Ó He believes he is his own person (property), that his strawman
id-entity is his own, and thus that said legal persona is not property of the district that birthed it.
He believes he (in person) has the right to alter the character of that legal persona he is standing in
bond and surety for, because he knows not how to mentally separate his false legal persona

!1121
(property) from his True Self. He is the perfect mind control subject, a study in public mindedness.
He believes that he may “assert all his rights” in this instance, which is another way of stating that
he believes that he actually has reserved some Natural Rights not given up to government in
exchange for his status in public citizen-ship. He believes there is inheritable blood in his straw-
man, not realizing that appearing as such a Þctional entity is to admit and consent to its very
purpose, a corruption (attainder) of the blood of the lawful heir. This foolishness is based not
merely on a lack of knowledge but on the misguided information of other public-minded gurus
seeking proÞt in mammon. But most of all, like most of us out here, this is the reasoning of a man
who turned his back on God (the only Source of unalienable, Natural rights) without
comprehension of his own actions. He is trying to apply the common law (including the unwritten
Law of scripture and Nature) to his contractual state of citizen-ship that exists outside of the
common law. He is attempting to alter the status of the property of another. But again, the maxim
of law states that the contract makes the law. He is trying to intermingle two sets of opposing law, one
of God (Nature) and one of the legality of nations (anti-God). He is attempting to make a
declaration about a person (status) that does not belong to him. He is trying to tell government
what his public person (status) is, as if a slave may ever insist upon his master anything at all. He
believes that he may patent land himself, instead of correctly being granted such a patent by the
State and United States according to his qualiÞed, private status. And he believes that he may
arbitrarily tell the court what his persona is, despite the fact that the court is the administrator of
that strawman (person), which again is wholly the property of the corporation nation.

My intent is not to belittle this man in his efforts at comprehension, and indeed my respect goes out
to any and all who at least attempt to Þght this system of the devilmasters (attorneys) that created
it. However, we must learn from our mistakes, and this is the perfect example of foolishness. As a
self-admitted fool, as well as a tinkerer in legal matters just as this man is experimenting within
that legal system, I use this example only to show that every fool, including myself, can be
regenerate from such legal thought patterns of publicly induced education and mind control
(govern-ment). All learned men start out as fools, and yet the only ones that succeed are those who
realize and bear their former foolhardiness as a badge of honor, as that state of foolish being that
was Þnally overcame by dis-covering and following after and becoming like the Right Hand of God.

In fact, I wish to commend this man for posting this response. His questions were indeed answer-
ed, though not the way he desired. For as we will read, this response is an utter defeat, which
means that he fell for some non-attorney guru’s soothsaying and followed in error his non-legal ad-
vice. For posting this humiliating response, this man show more backbone, more honor and
bravery than most of us can muster. My hat’s off to this man, for the lessons we all can learn and
the facts we may conÞrm herein come straight from the devilÕs mouth!

Unless we realize the part we play and the mask (persona) we operate under, we will never be
heard or under-stood by these gods of the legal realm with the correct language and intent in court.
We do not tell the court anything while in surety for its person (property), it tells us through our
bondage under its words of art. We are not creators and we do not control anything except what
business we are free (enfranchised) as denizens by law to commercially transact.

And so let us now view the perfectly written response to this vulgar, dog-Latin inquiry so that we
may know our place in this system while in its publicly issued, proprietary persona. Let the patriot
mythology hereby be crushed through reason and by the proper, petrifying legal (evil) magic that
created such patriotic fervor for that which enslaves us.

Begin Excerpt:

Because answering your Þrst question will entail considering the propositions set forth in your
second question, I will address the two together.

RESPONSE - In my opinion, THE STATE CAN CLEARLY IMPOSE PROPERTY TAX ON

GOVERNMENT PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN CONVEYED TO A PRIVATE PARTY BY

!1122
LAND PATENT. Based on the opinions expressed in your second question, I assume that your
phrase “the land patent is current” REFERS TO THE PRACTICE OF INDIVIDUALS
FILING DOCUMENTS IN THE LAND RECORDS ASSERTING THEIR SUPPOSED
“PATENT” INTEREST IN PROPERTY. In my opinion, such Þlings HAVE NO LEGAL
SIGNIFICANCE OTHER THAN POSSIBLY TO CLOUD TITLE TO PROPERTY WITHOUT
ANY LEGAL JUSTIFICATION. I disagree with the proposition that “allodial” property is not
subject to taxation, and I do not believe the Þling of any purported “patent” can relieve a
property owner of the obligation to pay property taxes.

As you note in your request, Ark. Constitution article 2, § 28 provides: “ALL LANDS IN THIS
STATE ARE DECLARED TO BE ALLODIAL; AND FEUDAL TENURES OF EVERY
DESCRIPTION, WITH ALL THEIR INCIDENTS, ARE PROHIBITED.” Black’s Law
Dictionary (7th ed. 1999) offers the following pertinent deÞnitions:

Allodial: Held in absolute ownership; PERTAINING TO AN ALLODIUM.

Allodium: An estate HELD IN FEE SIMPLE ABSOLUTE.

“In this country, one who has full ownership of land is said to own it allodially – that is,
FREE OF FEUDAL SERVICES AND INCIDENTS.” —Thomas F. Bergin & Paul G. Haskell,
Preface to Estates in Land and Future Interests 18 (2d ed. 1984).

This deÞnition invites analysis in light of the following discussion in 1 D. Thomas, Thompson on
Real Property § 4.06, at 155-57 (Thomas ed. 1994):

“Students of the common law are told that the fee simple absolute is the greatest estate
in land known to the common law, and that its two chief characteristics are
INHERITABILITY AND ALIENABILITY. The precise etymology of the term “fee” is
uncertain, but it is obviously related to other terms SIGNIFYING THE FEUDAL
RELATIONSHIP, such as enfeoffment. In the medieval era, A HOLDING IN FEE WAS
A FEUDAL HOLDING, THAT IS, SUBJECT TO THE RIGHTS AND RESTRICTIONS
OF FEUDAL TENURES; UNDER THE TERMS OF THESE TENURES ENJOYMENT
OF LAND WAS CONDITIONED UPON RENDERING VARIOUS SERVICES AND
PAYMENTS TO A SUPERIOR OWNER. Thus ownership in fee could be contrasted with
“allodial” ownership, by which one held free of any other ownerÕs restrictions or
concurrent rights, EXCEPT THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATE.”

***

…The fee simple of the thirteenth century WAS UNLIKE THE MODERN FEE SIMPLE,
mostly because the medieval estate consisted only of a set of FEUDAL DUES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES (all related to and BURDENING THE LAND, of course), whereas THE
MODERN FEE IS SIMPLY FULL OWNERSHIP SUBJECT TO A LESS ONEROUS SET OF
SOVEREIGN PREROGATIVES.
This historical summary, which strikes me as fully consistent with the Black’s Law Dictionary
deÞnition, suggests that the MEDIEVAL notion of allodial ownership HAS MERGED WITH
THE MODERN notion of ownership in fee simple absolute, signifying absolute ownership
in the fee holder, subject to no feudal incidents BUT NEVERTHELESS QUALIFIED BY
CERTAIN CONTINUING SOVEREIGN PREROGATIVES.

Having tentatively ventured this conclusion, I should note the existence of differing authority
regarding the meaning of allodial title. In the course of extensively ANALYZING JUST WHAT
PROPERTY INTEREST, IF ANY, IS CONVEYED BY THE ISSUANCE OF A “LAND
PATENT,” the court in Britt v. Federal Land Bank Association of St. Louis, 505 N.E.2d 387, 392 (Ill.
App. 1987), drew the following distinction between allodial title and fee simple title:

!1123
 “UNDER COMMON LAW TRADITION, ALL PRIVATE TITLES SINCE NORMAN
TIMES HAVE ORIGINATED FROM TITLE HELD BY THE SOVEREIGN. (1 Tiffany, The
Law of Real Property § 13 (2d 3d. 1920).) The seminal opinion in American jurisprudence
analyzing the origin of sovereign titles and setting forth the principles by which
conßicting title claims based upon competing sovereignties [sic: verb missing] was
authored by Mr. Chief Justice Marshall in Johnson & Graham’s Lessee v. M’Intosh (1823), 21
U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543, 5 L.Ed. 681. There, Chief Justice Marshall outlined THE MEANS BY
WHICH SOVEREIGNS ACQUIRE TITLE (CONQUEST, CESSION AND TREATY) and
stated that by the Treaty of Paris in 1783:

Ò[T]HE POWERS OF GOVERNMENT, AND THE RIGHT TO SOIL, WHICH HAD

PREVIOUSLY BEEN IN GREAT BRITAIN, PASSED DEFINITIVELY TO THE
STATES.” Johnson & Graham’s Lessee v. M’Intosh (1823), 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543, 5 L.Ed. 681,
691.

This SOVEREIGN TITLE, WHICH IS ABSOLUTE AND ENCOMPASSES BOTH

OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND AND THE RIGHT TO GOVERN THE INHABITANTS
THEREOF, IS “ALLODIAL” TITLE. This term is used IN CONTRADISTINCTION to the
term “fee simple title,” which contemplates THE HIGHEST TITLE WHICH MAY BE
PRIVATELY HELD. (1Tiffany, The Law of Real Property §§ 6 and 13 (2d ed. 1920).) In current
usage, THE HOLDER OF FEE SIMPLE TITLE IS STILL SUBJECT TO DISPOSSESSION BY
THE GOVERNMENT, THROUGH DUE PROCESS OF LAW, FOR NONPAYMENT OF
REAL ESTATE TAXES AND BY EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDINGS.

Regardless of which of these deÞnitions of allodial title one accepts Ð either that it represents
the equivalent of fee simple title or that it represents the governmentÕs overarching interest in
property within the range of its governance Ð I believe the government is clearly invested
with the right to tax private real property.

As the foregoing should suggest, I DISAGREE WITH THE APPARENT ASSUMPTION

UNDERLYING YOUR REQUEST THAT “ALLODIAL” OWNERSHIP LOCATES
PROPERTY BEYOND THE RANGE OF GOVERNMENT CONTROL, including through
taxation. In Wash. Op. Att’y Gen. No. 96-006, my counterpart from the state of Washington
addressed a request similar to yours involving a property ownerÕs claim to be exempt from
property taxation by virtue of his alleged status as the holder of an “allodial freehold
estate.Ó By way of background, the Washington Attorney General reported:

The… PROPERTY OWNER FILED A DECLARATION of homestead UPON THE

COUNTY RECORDS. HE ATTACHED TO THAT DECLARATION A DOCUMENT
entitled “Declaration of Assignee’s Update of Patent.” The “Declaration” consists of a
description of the property, followed by a long recitation OF WHAT THE PROPERTY
OWNER APPARENTLY BELIEVES TO BE recognized as legal principles regarding
land patents. [[1]] Also attached was a copy of what is described as the original land
patent from the United States.


My counterpart offered the following analysis in rejecting the property owner’s claim to be
exempt from taxation as the holder of a patent on an allodial freehold:

The legal concept of holding land by Òallodial freeholdÓ or Òin allodiumÓ TRACES TO
THE FEUDAL ROOTS OF THE ENGLISH SYSTEM OF LAND TENURE. As it
operated at the height of the middle ages, FEUDALISM INVOLVED A DESCENDING
PYRAMID OF LORDS AND VASSALS. THE MONARCH GRANTED TENURE TO
TENANTS IN CHIEF, WHO IN TURN OFTEN GRANTED PORTIONS OF THEIR
ESTATES TO OTHERS. Those lower on the pyramid OWED CERTAIN
OBLIGATIONS, in the form of military service, cash, crops, or other services, TO THE
HIGHER LORD. This system generated the revenues and services WITH WHICH THE

!1124
 MONARCH FINANCED THE EXPENSES OF GOVERNMENT AND MAINTAINED
AN ARMY. —C. Moynihan, Introduction to the Law of Real Property 1-8 (2d ed. 1988).

…The distinction between property held subject to tenure and in allodium has long since
been derogated to mere academic interest. The obligations owed by vassals to their
lords, such as providing the services of a particular number of knights, were gradually
superseded as society modernized. WHILE CONCEPTS OF LAND TENURE WERE
INITIALLY IMPORTED TO THE AMERICAN COLONIES, AS EVIDENCED BY
ORIGINAL ROYAL LAND GRANTS, SUCH CONCEPTS HAVE BEEN ABOLISHED
WITH [SIC] ALL LAND, long since held FREE OF FEUDAL OBLIGATION. —
Moynihan, supra, at 18-23.

There is no reason to conclude that the concepts of feudal landholding, including that
of the allodial freehold, bear any current relevance to the payment of property taxes.
OUR STATE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES FOR A UNIFORM POWER OF TAXATION
AS TO ALL PROPERTY. —Const. art. 7, § 1… THERE CAN, THEREFORE, BE NO
QUESTION BUT THAT PROPERTY TAXES CAN BE IMPOSED WITHOUT REGARD
TO WHETHER THE SUBJECT REAL ESTATE CAN BE DESCRIBED AS ALLODIAL.

(Footnotes omitted.)

Although the Arkansas Supreme Court has never found occasion to address the issue, I feel
conÞdent that it would agree in all respects with the Washington Attorney GeneralÕs analysis.
SigniÞcantly, Ark. Const. art. 16, § 5, like the Washington constitutional provision referenced in
the passage just quoted, EXPRESSLY PROVIDES FOR THE TAXATION OF REAL
PROPERTY, indicating that the drafters of our constitution saw no contradiction in the
concept of taxing “allodial freeholds.” This harmony between the concepts of allodial
ownership and taxability is reßected in the following summation by the Maryland Supreme
Court:

ÒAfter the close of the Revolutionary War, the ownership of property in this country has
frequently been referred to as "allodial" in nature or that the property is held by "allodial
tenure." In its strict sense, "allodium" means land owned absolutely, and not subject to any
rent, service, or other tenurial right of an overlord; however, it has been, and is,
UNIFORMLY RECOGNIZED THROUGHOUT THIS COUNTRY THAT THE
OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO THE RIGHTS OF GOVERNMENT TO
TAX THE PROPERTY, to regulate reasonably its use and enjoyment UNDER THE
POLICE POWER of the States, AND TO TAKE THE SAME, UPON PAYMENT OF THE
VALUE THEREOF, when needed for a public purpose.” —City of Annapolis v. Waterman,
745 A.2d 1000, 1006-07 (Md. 2000).

My own research suggests that the Maryland courtÕs summation of the law is totally accurate: I
HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO LOCATE A SINGLE INSTANCE IN WHICH ANY COURT IN
ANY JURISDICTION HAS HELD THAT REAL PROPERTY IS EXEMPT FROM
TAXATION BY VIRTUE OF ITS ALLODIAL CHARACTER.
SpeciÞcally with respect to the relationship between patents and taxability, the Maryland
Supreme Court has more recently observed:

“Through the relationship between the states and the federal government in the post-
revolutionary era, THE LORD PROPRIETOR'S SUCCESSORS, THE STATES, BECAME
VESTED WITH THE RIGHT TO GRANT AND PATENT TITLES TO LAND TO THE
CITIZENS, A PROCESS THAT CONTINUES. The grants and patents are SUBJECT TO
THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE CREATED TITLE TO PROPERTY BE SUBJECT TO
CHARGES ON THE LAND and that the title owners, AND THEIR SUCCESSORS, pay
such taxes or charges on the land so granted, as the states from time to time, deem
necessary for the proper functioning of government. THE LAND ITSELF IS SUBJECT

!1125
 TO TAXES. If the taxes are not paid, the title to the land through the tax sale process is
granted and titled anew to the tax sale purchaser.” —Lippert v. Jung, 783 A.2d 206, 217 (Md.
2001)

As this passage suggests, A LAND PATENT IS A CONVEYANCE OF PUBLIC LAND TO

PRIVATE OWNERSHIP; IT IS NOT A “DECLARATION” BY A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
FACED WITH A MORTGAGE OR TAX LIEN THAT HE OWNS AN INDEFEASIBLE
INTEREST IN PROPERTY BY PATENT. Given this distinction, courts have been
understandably impatient when defendants before or after judgment CLOUD TITLE TO
PROPERTY BY FILING BOGUS “DECLARATIONS OF PATENTS.” This judicial attitude is
demonstrated in Britt, supra, in which THE APPELLANTS FILED VARIOUS “LAND
PATENTS” AND THEN SUED TO QUIET TITLE in property they had lost to foreclosure.
After characterizing THE PLAINTIFFS’ BRIEFS as “NOTHING MORE THAN A
COMPILATION OF DISJOINTED AND NONSENSICAL CLAIMS AND LEGAL
CONCLUSIONS TOTALLY UNSUPPORTED BY CITATIONS TO THE RECORD OR
RELEVANT LEGAL AUTHORITY,” 505 N.E.2d at 389, the court offered the following
analysis:

“[T]he courts of other States and the Federal courts have spoken to the issue of the legal
sufÞciency of Ôland patents.ÕÓ These courts have rendered decisions upon a variety of
issues based upon facts similar to the case at bar, WHERE PLAINTIFFS IN A SUIT TO
QUIET TITLE FILED A DOCUMENT DESCRIBED AS A LAND PATENT AND
CLAIMED SUPERIOR TITLE TO THAT OF THE PURCHASER at the judicial sale of
the property. —Hilgeford v. Peoples Bank (7th Cir.1985), 776 F.2d 176; Hilgeford v. Peoples
Bank (N.D.Ind.1985), 607 F.Supp. 536; Nixon v. Phillipoff (N.D.Ind.1985), 615 F.Supp. 890;
Federal Land Bank v. Gefroh (N.D.1986), 390 N.W.2d 46; Timm v. State Bank (Minn.App.1985),
374 N.W.2d 588; Wisconsin v. Glick (7th Cir.1986), 782 F.2d 670. Because of the lack of Illinois
case law on what appears to be A PROCEDURE WITHOUT LEGAL FOUNDATION in
Illinois, we Þnd the analysis of Judge William C. Lee of the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Indiana in Hilgeford v. Peoples Bank (Hilgeford v. Peoples Bank
(N.D.Ind.1985), 607 F.Supp. 536) instructive. There, as here, THE PLAINTIFFS
ATTEMPTED TO ESTABLISH SUPERIOR TITLE TO THE PROPERTY FORECLOSED
UPON BY THEIR MORTGAGEE, the Peoples Bank. Judge Lee observed:

“The “patent” involved here IS NOT A GRANT BY THE UNITED STATES; IT IS

A GRANT BY THE PLAINTIFFS. The “patent” here IS NOT A GRANT TO SOME
OTHER HOLDER SO AS TO PASS TITLE ON TO ANOTHER PARTY; IT IS A
SELF-SERVING DOCUMENT WHEREBY THE PLAINTIFFS GRANT THE
PATENT TO THEMSELVES. This “patent” does not involve or concern “public
land” — it relates to plaintiffs' private property. The court cannot conceive how
these federal provisions are implicated here, and THUS FEDERAL QUESTION
JURISDICTION IS ABSENT.”

Of course, the purported “land patent” in this case fails for reasons independent of
jurisdiction. As was noted before, the Òland patentÓ attached to plaintiffs' various Þlings
IS A GRANT OF A LAND PATENT FROM THE PLAINTIFFS TO THE PLAINTIFFS. It
is, quite simply, AN ATTEMPT TO IMPROVE TITLE BY SAYING IT IS BETTER. The
court cannot conceive of A POTENTIALLY MORE DISRUPTIVE FORCE IN THE
WORLD OF PROPERTY LAW than the ability of a PERSON to get “superior” title to
land BY SIMPLY FILLING OUT A DOCUMENT GRANTING HIMSELF A “LAND
PATENT” AND THEN FILING IT WITH THE RECORDER OF DEEDS. SUCH SELF-
SERVING, GRATUITOUS ACTIVITY DOES NOT, CANNOT AND WILL NOT BE
SUFFICIENT BY ITSELF TO CREATE GOOD TITLE. —505 N.E.2d at 390, quoting 607 F.
Supp. at 538-39.

The court in Britt summarized as follows the effect of a legitimate conveyance of property by
land patent:

!1126
 What is TOTALLY INCORRECT is the implicit foundation of the Britts’ position: that the
land patent issued to “James Evans” and “Francis Evans” in 1841 conveyed the entire
title of the Federal government, such that no interest arising by operation of State law
can attach to the title.

A LAND PATENT IS MERELY THE DEED BY WHICH THE GOVERNMENT PASSES

FEE SIMPLE TITLE OF GOVERNMENT LAND TO PRIVATE PERSONS. (63 Am. Jur.
2d Public Lands § 70 (1984).) Once fee simple title is passed to an individual from the
government, whether by land patent or otherwise, CLAIMS ARISING FROM
CONVEYANCE OR MORTGAGE BY THAT HOLDER WILL BE ENFORCED
AGAINST HIM. (Cf., Stark v. Starr (1876), 94 U.S. (4 Otto)477, 24 L.Ed. 276; United States v.
Budd (1891), 144 U.S. 154, 12 S.Ct. 575, 36 L.Ed. 384; see also 63A Am.Jur.2d Public Lands § 92
(1984).) Where, as here, a decree of foreclosure and sale has divested title from the former
mortgagor, THE MERE FACT THAT THE MORTGAGOR’S CLAIM OF TITLE MAY
RUN DIRECTLY BACK THROUGH HIS FAMILY TO A 19TH CENTURY PATENT IS
OF NO CONSEQUENCE. 505 N.E.2d at 392.

The court in Britt, like the court in Hilgeford, WAS SO INCENSED BY THE FILING OF
BOGUS “PERFECTED PATENTS” DESIGNED TO CLOUD TITLE TO PROPERTY that it
imposed signiÞcant sanctions in the form of attorneysÕ fees both below and on appeal. Id. at
393-94. It further advised the prevailing defendant to consult the supreme court should it elect
to pursue DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST PLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL FOR FILING AN
OBVIOUSLY FRIVOLOUS CLAIM. The court quoted with obvious agreement the following
attribution of motive for such bogus Þlings offered by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals
in Wisconsin v. Glick, 782 F.2d 670, 671-72 (7th Cir. 1986):

People SADDLED WITH MORTGAGES may treasure the idea of having clean title to
their homes. THE USUAL WAY TO OBTAIN CLEAN TITLE IS TO PAY ONE’S DEBTS.
SOME HAVE DECIDED THAT IT IS CHEAPER TO WRITE A “LAND PATENT”
PURPORTING TO CONVEY UNASSAILABLE TITLE, AND TO FILE THAT
“PATENT” IN THE RECORDING SYSTEM.

In my opinion, a reviewing Arkansas court would apply this same analysis, possibly
accompanied by sanctions of the sort discussed above, to an individual who sought to defeat
a property tax lien by Þling in the land records A PURPORTED DECLARATION OF
PATENT.

With respect to the list of legal propositions set forth in your second question, I have the
following remarks. First, nothing in any of the propositions dealing with the effect of land
patents EVEN REMOTELY SUGGESTS THAT A CONVEYANCE OF PUBLIC LAND BY
LAND PATENT WILL PRECLUDE THE GOVERNMENT FROM IMPOSING PROPERTY
TAX ON THE LAND. Second, despite the contrary suggestion set forth in your request, U.S. v.
City of Kodiak, 132 F. Supp. 574 (D.C. Terr. of Alaska 1955), DOES NOT HOLD THAT
“[U]NRESTRICTED ALLODIAL PROPERTY IS NOT SUBJECT TO LOCAL TAXATION.”
Regardless of whether allodial title is deemed coextensive with fee simple title, UNDER ANY
READING OF THE TERM IT WILL NEVER BE “UNRESTRICTED,” GIVEN THAT THE
GOVERNMENT RETAINS VARIOUS SOVEREIGN PREROGATIVES, INCLUDING THE
POWER TO TAX THE PROPERTY. Moreover, THE RULING IN KODIAK HAS NOTHING
TO DO WITH THE TAXATION OF ALLODIAL PROPERTY. The case stands only for the
proposition that a municipal court cannot impose a tax on property that Congress, IN ITS
ROLE AS TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGN AND GUARDIAN over certain Alaskan Indian
and Eskimo natives, has expressly exempted from taxation.

My reading of Ark. Const. art. 2, § 28 essentially tracks one offered by the Wisconsin Supreme
Court in interpreting a materially indistinguishable provision of the Wisconsin Constitution:

!1127
 Article I, sec. 14, of the Wisconsin Constitution provides in pertinent part: “ALL LANDS
WITHIN THE STATE ARE DECLARED TO BE ALLODIAL, and feudal tenures are
prohibited…”

In Mutual Fed. S. & L. Asso. V. Wisconsin Wire Wks., 58 Wis. 2d 99, 108 n.1, 205 N.W. 2d 762, 767
(1973), appeal after remand, 71 Wis. d 531, 239 N.W. 2d 20 (1976), the court explained the meaning
of art. I, sec. 14:

It appears that sec. 14 of art. I was added to the Wisconsin Constitution FOR THE
PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING THAT ANCIENT PRINCIPLES OF FEUDAL
PROPERTY LAW ARE INAPPLICABLE WITHIN THIS STATE. In Barker v. Dayton
(1871), 28 Wis. 367, the court was called upon to deÞne the term “allodial,” which
appears in the provision. With respect to that term the court said, at pages 384, 385:

Taken in such connection, it means little more than if the framers had said “FREE,”
or “held in FREE and absolute ownership,” as contradistinguished from feudal
tenures, which are prohibited in the same sentence, and by the very next words, and
the prohibition of which, with their servitudes and reservations, and all the
attendant hindrances and obstacles in the way of free and ready sale and transfer of
real property, constituted the chief object of the provision.

Article I, sec. 14, of the Wisconsin Constitution protects against the establishment of feudal
tenures because that system of land ownership PREVENTED EASY TRANSFER OF LAND.
It does not prohibit Dane County from taxing the EveryÕs land, nor from taking a tax deed if
real estate taxes are not paid, nor from evicting the Everys from Dan CountyÕs real estate.

In my opinion, if faced with the issue, the Arkansas Supreme Court would construe Ark.
Const. art. 2, § 28 in precisely this manner.

Assistant Attorney General Jack Druff prepared the foregoing, which I hereby approve.

Sincerely,

MARK PRYOR
Attorney General

Footnotes included: MP:JD/cyh

[1] The mantric tone of a typical “declaration of patent” is illustrated by one addressed in
Federal Land Bank of Spokane v. Redwine, 755 P.2d 822-23 (Wash. 1988), in which the
Washington Supreme Court afÞrmed a trial courtÕs grant of summary judgment rejecting a
property ownerÕs claim that his declaration necessarily defeated his mortgageeÕs effort to
foreclose: “I bring up this Land Patent or Grant IN MY NAME, as it is the only way a
paramount, allodial and perfect title can be had IN MY NAME... IF THIS LAND PATENT IS
NOT CHALLENGED BY SOMEONE IN A COURT OF LAW WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM THE
DATE OF THIS FILING, THEN THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY SHALL BECOME
MINE AS AN ALLODIAL FREEHOLD.” In addressing the claims of
“CONSTITUTIONALIST” GROUPS PRONE TO MISREPRESENT THE NATURE OF
ALLODIAL OWNERSHIP, one commentator has remarked: MANY OF THE DOCUMENTS
SUBMITTED BY THE GROUPS INDICATE A BELIEF THAT THE CIVIL AND CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEMS OPERATE ON THE BASIS OF MAGIC WORDS OR MYSTIC
DOCUMENTS AND ALL THAT ONE MUST DO TO MAKE THE GOVERNMENT OR
HIS OPPONENT CEASE IS TO SAY THE MAGIC WORDS OR TO SEND THE MYSTIC
DOCUMENTS. —Lawrence G. Wasden, Constitutionalist Groups Misrepresent Both Fact and Law,
Advocate 8, 9 (Idaho 1996). This belief was amusingly demonstrated by a married couple who
resisted an effort to liquidate secured collateral in their federal bankruptcy action by Þling in

!1128
 state court the following “Constructive Notice and Demand,” including among the
defendants the bankruptcy judge: That Deponents hereby DEMAND that you, and each of
you, CEASE AND DESIST from any further unlawful acts with respect to Deponents’ persons
and property. That any attempts to Hinder, Obstruct, harass or Interfere with Deponents’ said
Allodial Freehold Property Rights, will result in criminal and civil charges being initiated
against the offending parties in a court, at Law, with competent jurisdiction. Apparently duly
intimidated, the bankruptcy judge honored the allodial freeholders’ demand to stop
meddling in their affairs: HE DISMISSED THEIR PETITION IN BANKRUPTCY,
LEAVING THEM TO THE TENDER MERCIES OF THEIR NOW UNRESTRAINED
CREDITORS. —In re Lehs, 48 Bankr. 469, 470 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 1985).

[2] Indeed, the court has referred to Ark. Const. art. 2, § 28, which contains the reference to
“allodial” property, on only one occasion, and then merely to remark in passing that the
provision DID NOT BEAR ON THE DISPUTED ISSUE. —Funk v. Dyess Colony, Inc., 200 Ark.
180, 191, 139 S.W.2d 12 (1940).

End Excerpt.

—=—

Bottom line: No man is sovereign, only the State. There is no actual (individual) People, and
People is just a term to mean the private State(s). No man is ever a plural, and thus no man is ever
“the People.” No man, and certainly no person (status) under any state or nation, can ever be
higher than the State (sovereign authority). Therefore, while private persons may take public land
into their private hands by a permissively granted land patent, public persons have no such right
granted to their foreign status, meaning a foreigner (US citizenship) cannot hold the land of one of
the foreign States. All States are foreign to each other, including the United States, which is foreign
to all 50 States (People). And Þnally, no citizen, private or public is immune from the constitutional
duties of each State, and each State constitution certainly declares the State’s (People’s) right to
collect tax upon any property, including that which was granted in modern fee as a patented title.

So what is left in this “movement” of so-called patriotic truth?

We have destroyed all foundational beliefs and logical fallacies here, revealing the American dream
to be more like a feudal nightmare. We know now that there is no True sovereignty, that only the
Þctional corporation called the State (People) carries such a ßattering title. There is no reason or
logic to remaining patriotic in conceit of one’s own defeat and voluntary servitude under blood
corruption. There is no True Liberty or Freedom here, unless you under-stand the legal (anti-
Nature/anti-God) deÞnition of freedom and liberty to be a commercial franchise under the state
(false, sovereign gods), which is no True Freedom at all. And Þnally, and most importantly, God
and Jesus the christos, as the Word/Law/Son of God, is certainly nowhere to be found within this
deviling legal system, in its constitutions, in its so-called “People,” in its “Law of the Land,” and
certainly not within its Þctional legal existence and pretended jurisdiction (nouns). But I digress…

Before starting a whole new volume on the subject, I wish here only for the reader to have this clear
and concise reference at his disposal before he falls for the many “self-help” legal gurus out there
itching to relieve one of one’s hard earned slave-wages. This is the gift of perspective; one being
that of the slave and one of the master. Argue with the guru and romancer of mythology all you
wish, but once the religious aspect of this strange, false-patriotic legalism is set in one’s mind, this
Þctional, legal matrix is as real and legitimate to one’s conscious awareness as it is for a “Jew” to
claim settlement rights on a victimized and unlawfully dispossessed Palestinian home; a
fallaciously self-patented “right of return” to the land/property of fore-fathers that never Existed
there in that more modernly built private abode. Same patriotism, only in that case its racial, and
called as Zionism instead of exceptionalism. And any way you look at it, it deÞes all reason and
purpose of law. It is an excuse to attempt to receive reparations for that which has nothing to do
with you. It uses legal law as an excuse to harm, or in the desperate debtor under a foreclosure
case’s mind, to pretend to lawfully renege on contracted debts by using the law with ill intent.

!1129
If there is one thing I certainly agree with as to the Bible scriptures, it’s that one is responsible for
one’s obligations and debts. The great delusion is that through paperwork and magic words one
may eliminate the debts they accumulated under legal contract and while in the proprietary person
of another. This is patriotic foolishness. The scriptures tell us to render back to Caesar what is
Caesar’s, which would also happen to include any legal title or patent to land.

So where does that leave us? What have we learned here? To recap:

1. No man is sovereign. Only the church and state (artiÞcial persons) are sovereign.
Sovereignty is just another patriot mythology. Sovereignty is only a legal (anti-God)
concept, another ßattering title not Existing self-evidently in Nature. The word Sovereign
is not in the Bible except in very modern translations, and this word sovereign was used
to replace the word Adonay (Strong’s H136 - ‘Adonay), which is always and only used
before the word Jehovah (e.g., “Sovereign LORDÓ). In other words, only God (Jehovah) is
Truly Sovereign, not man, and so man’s election of God shows which Sovereign and Law
(Real or legal) he is subordinate to. Sovereignty requires belief in false gods (corporations).


2. The whole, as ÒWe, the People,Ó is an artiÞcially created, legal sovereignty. But the parts of
the whole are not sovereigns over other men, for that would be a feudal tenure, which is
outlawed here. The State is the only feudal landlord with feudal tenure, not any man as
landholder. The landholder proÞts from the land, but is not the law of the land he proÞts
from. Only through subjection and taxation to the whole may the part (citizen) partake in
that granted title under State sovereignty. Jehovah and the Natural Law is no part of this.


3. Allodial status exists only legally (constitutionally), and only in the State (the whole).
Private citizens can only hold a perfected patent to that allodial land in allodium (fee
simple absolute), which means his sovereign lord is the Þctional State (People) that
granted that patent on its feudally held and tenured land. The land, though, never leaves
the allodial holdings of the State (People), even when held privately by one of its private
citizens. Again, no man or person is higher in status than that which grants such statuses,
meaning no man or Þctional person is ever higher than his Source/Creator.


4. No man or citizen can simply self-patent the land. There is no magic paperwork that we
may use to somehow demand a patent be created out of thin air, from our own magic
words. We are not magicians; not the creators of such artful things. And so one self-
evidently cannot hold something with more authority than that from which it was
granted. Property (public persons) simply cannot hold property, just as slaves cannot hold
other slaves. A patent is not a property, merely a perfection of title. The title belongs to the
State (People), not the patentee (landholder). Only the State may grant such a private,
perfected title, and with that grant comes the burden of protection, and thus with it
subjection (including taxation) under the constitutions of the States (People).


5. The patriot movement has become more of a religion creating its own doctrinal truth than
an exercise in reason and knowledge. It is a logic-based dialectic based on very bad
grammar (adversaria), opinion, faith, and extremely limited and personal perspectives. It
cannot seem to differentiate Reality from its own desires and from Þction. It uses quotes
out of context from both legal cases and from the Bible that do not apply in any way, and
it is conveniently overlooked that all legal things are anti-God, including names, titles,
patents, and all forms of money, even gold and silver.


6. No Truly, Naturally Free man under God may use the legal system to claim a right or title
and still be under God’s Law. One cannot have two masters. One cannot follow two
opposing systems of law. The religious man cannot taint his name with such additions of
legal Þction except that he cease to be a Purely religious man and follow in surety an
opposing law under the property of some false, legal god.


!1130
 7. Strangely enough, no one man is actually “the People,” for no Real man is a plural entity.
ÒThe PeopleÓ (gods) are merely a Þction of law; a construct of the legal matrix. It is the
corporate god “The People” that sues each individual person, though there is never a list
of just whom Òthe PeopleÓ are given to the defendant. This is because there is no actual
People called Òthe People.Ó ItÕs just the name of a corporate entity, an intangible deity. No
man is ÒThe People,Ó for no man is a plural thing, nor should he be part of any thing for
that matter. We are instructed to Be (Exist) only in the I Am.

—=—

I have included this as a Þnal entry of legal opinion and fact not to confuse, but to enlighten the
reader. The Truth hurts, I know. For many years I too believed in this land patent and allodial title
mythos, that I could help myself to any claim I saw Þt over public lands. These AttorneyÕs General
answers were right on and commendably relevant. But for GodÕs sake, above all else, donÕt forget
that these are attorneys; actors; employed and pensioned tools of the false gods. These are the
agents of the legal matrix, and ultra-protective of its coded design and word DNA! Their response
was, as easy or as difÞcult as it might have been for them, respectful only to their own artful
profession and only in support of the hand (government) that feeds them and ensures their Þction-
al status and ßattering title in false existence at Bar. But this whole inquiry should again be read as a
request, as nothing more or less than a PRAYER by a subject to its master; to the administrators of
persons and titles. The citizen-ship that knows not even the origin of his bonded legal persona nor
the power of his own christian name while under bonded surety to another certainly was not going
to get one over on these organized apologists, pirates, and wordsmiths of the legal profession.



The point here again is that public persons cannot hold private land, and therefore cannot hold a
patent on private land. The land held in the public trust under the United States must Þrst be
granted into ÒlegitimatelyÓ private hands, and only then would the State (People) allow that land
to fall under the title of being patented (similar to fee simple absolute), though not under oneÕs sole
feudal hands. Once this land is held in such allodial status and only then under patent (in
allodium/fee simple absolute), did you happen to notice that at best this is being done so in a
private franchise (free-hold)? Did you notice that itÕs not the man that is sovereign, but the State
(People) as a sacred (cursed) deity? Did you notice that the State remains in that highest legal,
sovereign capacity as the allodial holder of that land, and that any individual (undivided citizen),
private patent-holder to that land is not the actual allodial landlord over the inhabitants of that
land? In other words, did you notice that the State, ÒThe People,Ó are still by law oneÕs pluralistic
god? LetÕs be clear here, private does not mean Naturally Free under God, and still requires fealty
to a lesser god (the State). Do you now understand why this is so important?

The State and no other entity holds land in allodial status. Thus the State (god, The People) alone
has the right of rule over the public inhabitants of all lands private or public. The State is a legal
sovereign, not the individual man (person). The patent holder, in other words, has no power over
the in-habitants of any land patented but what is prescribed to him by that government. If he did,
this would qualify as a feudal tenure over the other inhabitants of that land. He holds land in the
stead of and only through the People (State), on behalf and in conspiratorial, confederated support
of it, and under its private (local) law and protection. And so of course he must pay constitutionally
allowed (unreserved) taxes under this subjection for that godÕs military protection.

The greatest lesson here is that no man is ever actually sovereign. Sovereignty is a ratiÞed and
conÞrmed lie (a legal truth). The ÒPopeÓ is certainly a Þctionally sovereign ofÞce (another lie), but
the Living, Breathing man that bears that Þsh-hat of ÒPopeÓ as an ofÞce is not sovereign, only the
ofÞce is. And the ofÞce, the false persona in ßattery of title, causes the frail old man acting as pope
to be completely irresponsible for his own actions as a man. This state of Þctional godship is 100%
against scriptural teachings. The self-appointed, legalistic or ecclesiastic status (persona) of
sovereignty is commercial property of the Vatican corporation and city-state, the so-called ÒHoly
See.Ó No present or former man acting as president is a sovereign man, only the proprietary title
carries that style and status, as transferable clothing for any emperor. ÒPresidentÓ is as well the

!1131
proprietary title of the United States. And of course only the crown and ofÞce (false persona) of
King and Queen is sovereign, not the men bearing those crowns. The “Queen of England” is a
sovereign title in corporation sole. But the man (female) in and of herself, despite her fabled
bloodline genealogy, is just a cowardly man hiding behind that jeweled, Victorian curtain and laced
clothing of deceit. All so-called sovereignty is legal, ecclesiastical, and thus artiÞcial. No man is
sovereign, only God, including all of those false gods of the nations.

Standing in self-Existence is that one beautiful exception. Jehovah is the only True Sovereign Being,
for Jehovah is all Being, all Life in Living, Equitable Oneness. This self-Existent Truth is not
questioned by any nation or State, and is well-known to those many religious imposters. A man of
God, as one that follows the Law of Jehovah alone and without addition or ad-diction, bears the
burden and Truth of that only True Sovereignty. He is the subject and the master, the protector and
the benefactor. No artiÞce is ever considered to be, even in its own doctrines, above Nature and Its
God. Thus all men may choose to be parts of the Sovereign Whole by entering into the Kingdom of
God through the example of christ. We may become the Living Heirs, but only if we return from
the legal dead and stop respecting and worshiping such false gods (sovereigns) over the only True
and Natural One. Do not mistake this for religion, for it is the foundational principles of Law as
recognized. The Law must therefore be religiously (without deviation or license) followed.



Consider this… when any State of the union seeks to tax property, of which a patent portends and
shows entitlement to the ownership thereof, it will always do so in its own currency, in this case the
constitutionally agreed upon United States dollar. One cannot pay that tax in anything else but
what it is charged in; not in cows or chickens or even in gold or silver. This is the ultimate power of
control, the control over the source of the printing, circulation, taxation, and collection of money.
Just as the colonies of America had to pay the king’s taxes in the kings’s script, of which they could
not create nor counterfeit in any way themselves, so too must the private landholders support their
own in-tangible sovereignty of which they are apparently a part of from the backs of the public
persons that tread there. Is this True Freedom? No! It is merely a subordinate position under a false
ÒsovereignÓ god. It is legalized privacy, but it is not True Sovereignty under the Lord Jehovah.

This foolish dream of sovereignty does not actually Exist in Reality for any man, for his estate and
status as land and patent-holder are as much his as the crown is the property of its current head of
hair (blood heir). The status (persona) and title of ÒlandholderÓ belongs to the State, just as the
status and title of “King” belongs to the Crown Corporation. These are in actuality burdens, not
free privileges. Privileges exist only legally (artiÞcially), by grant of some pretended sovereign
entity.

EMPOWER - A GRANT OF AUTHORITY rather than a command of its exercise. (Black4)

GRANT - To bestow; to confer; upon some one other than the person or entity which makes
the grant. A CONVEYANCE. Transfer of property real or personal by deed or writing. A
generic term applicable to ALL transfers of real property, including transfers by operation of
law as well as voluntary transfers. A transfer by deed of that which cannot be passed by
LIVERY. AN ACT EVIDENCED BY LETTERS PATENT UNDER THE GREAT SEAL,
GRANTING SOMETHING FROM THE KING TO A SUBJECT. As distinguished from a
mere license, A GRANT PASSES SOME ESTATE OR INTEREST, corporeal or lncorporeal,
IN THE LANDS which it embraces…

PRIVATE LAND GRANT - A grant by a public authority VESTING TITLE TO PUBLIC

LAND IN A PRIVATE (natural) PERSON.

PUBLIC GRANT - A grant from the public; a grant of a power, LICENSE, privilege, or
property, from the state or government to one or more INDIVIDUALS, contained in or
shown by a record, conveyance, PATENT, charter, etc. (Black4)

—=—

!1132
The public lands granted to private (State) citizens is not the same as the public granting of a
permissive license or privilege to a public “individual” (US citizen-ship) to use that land in
usufruct but without lawful interest. In other words, no districted public citizen-ship of the United
States has the right to a “private land grant” while acting in public persona.

—=—

“EVERY GRANT IS ATTENDED BY “AN IMPLIED CONTRACT” ON

THE PART OF THE GRANTOR not to claim again the thing granted.
Thus, grants are brought within the category OF CONTRACTS
HAVING CONTINUING OBLIGATION.” 



—Chief Justice Marshall, from his opinion in Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. 87

—=—

“FALSE OR BAD GRAMMAR DOES NOT VITIATE A GRANT. NEITHER

FALSE LATIN NOR FALSE ENGLISH WILL MAKE A DEED VOID when
the INTENT of the parties doth PLAINLY APPEAR.”
—FALSA GRAMMATICA NON VITIAT CONCESSIONEM. Shep. Touch. 55; 9 Coke, 48a. Shep. Touch. 87. (Black4)

—=—

As a Þnal affront to the senses, we can now understand completely the power and sovereign
authority of what was anciently and is modernly called as eminent domain. So that there is no doubt
left that the patriot mythology we cling to is a false dichotomy in every way, we may now
contemplate that the ultimate power of ownership and disposal of lands is not in any man or men,
but in the false god called the People. For no one individual of those supposed “People” can
override this right of the sovereignty to its eminent domain. But what is the sovereignty? It is no
man. This is the greatest of myths. The sovereignty, as with all other corporate entities around the
world, from the vatican and its fake ofÞce of pope to the United Kingdom with its sole corporate
ofÞces of king and queen, this notion of sovereignty only exists in the Þction, in the corporate
entity, under ßattering title, but never, ever in any man. 



Here in these deÞnitions, we discover the nature of just how non-sovereign each private citizen of
each private State and of the United States actually is. For all land is held principally in the States,
not by any man or private citizen. It is this invisible, intangible god Òthe PeopleÓ that holds all
property in its highest, feudalistic form. So let us complete her the grand delusion, the great legal
lie, by discovering the truth about that which holds the ultimate power of eminent domain. We are
indeed ruled by our belief and faith in Þction and its false gods (sovereigns).

DOMAIN - 1. DOMINION, OWNERSHIP, PROPERTY; ABSOLUTE PROPRIETORSHIP

OR RIGHT OF CONTROL. (WCA1889)

PUBLIC DOMAIN - Public lands, with any buildings thereon, held in trust by the
government. CONGRESS HAS EXCLUSIVE POWER TO DISPOSE OF THE PUBLIC
DOMAIN OF THE UNITED STATES, and the exercise of the power is limited only by the
discretion in that body. See Lands, Public. (WCA1889)

EMINENT DOMAIN - 1. The power to take private property for public uses is termed “the
right of eminent domain." "Eminent" imports HAVING PREFERENCE, BEING PARA-
MOUNT, PREROGATIVE, SOVEREIGN. ALL SEPARATE INTERESTS OF INDIVIDUALS
IN PROPERTY ARE HELD OF THE GOVERNMENT UNDER THE IMPLIED

!1133
RESERVATION THAT THE PROPERTY MAY BE TAKEN FOR THE PUBLIC USE, upon
paying a fair compensation, whenever the public interest requires it. The possession is to be
resumed in the manner directed by the constitution and laws. THE ULTIMATE RIGHT OF
THE SOVEREIGN, POWER TO APPROPRIATE, NOT ONLY THE PUBLIC PROPERTY,
BUT THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OF ALL CITIZENS WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL
SOVEREIGNTY, TO PUBLIC PURPOSES. Vattel says that the right in society or the
sovereign to dispose, in case of NECESSITY, and for the public safety, OF ALL THE
WEALTH (PROPERTY) IN THE STATE, is "eminent domain," AND A PREROGATIVE OF
MAJESTY. In every political sovereign community there inheres, necessarily, the right and
the duty of guarding its own existence, and of protecting and promoting the interests and
welfare of the community at large. This power, denominated the "eminent domain" of the
state, is, as its name imports, PARAMOUNT TO ALL PRIVATE RIGHTS VESTED UNDER
THE GOVERNMENT, and these last are, by necessary implication; held in subordination to
this power, and must yield in every instance to its proper exercise. The whole policy of the
country relative to roads, mills, bridges, and canals rests upon this single power, under which
lands have always been condemned; without the exertion of the power no one of these
improvements could be constructed. THE EXERCISE OF A FRANCHISE IS SUBJECT TO
THE POWER. The PROPRIETY of exercising the right is A POLITICAL QUESTION —
EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO DETERMINE. The mode of exercising the
right, in the ABSENCE of provision in the organic law prescribing a contrary course, IS
WITHIN THE DISCRETION OF THE LEGISLATURE. If the purpose be a public one, and
just compensation be paid or tendered the owner of the property taken, THERE IS NO
LIMITATION UPON THE POWER OF THE LEGISLATURE. The right of eminent domain
exists IN THE GOVERNMENT of the United States, AND MAY BE EXERCISED BY IT
WITHIN THE STATES, so far as is necessary to the enjoyment of the powers conferred by
the Constitution. Such authority is essential to its independent EXISTENCE AND
PERPETUITY. THESE CANNOT BE PRESERVED IF THE OBSTINACY OF A PRIVATE
PERSON, OR IF ANY OTHER AUTHORITY, CAN PREVENT THE ACQUISITION OF
THE MEANS OR INSTRUMENTS BY WHICH ALONE GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTIONS
CAN BE PERFORMED. NO ONE DOUBTS THE EXISTENCE IN THE STATE GOVERN-
MENTS OF THE RIGHT OF EMINENT DOMAIN, — A RIGHT DISTINCT FROM AND
PARAMOUNT TO THE RIGHT OF ULTIMATE OWNERSHIP. It grows out of the
necessities of their being, not out of the tenure by which lands are held. It may be exercised,
THOUGH THE LANDS ARE NOT HELD BY GRANT FROM THE GOVERNMENT, either
mediately or immediately, AND INDEPENDENT OF THE CONSIDERATION WHETHER
THEY WOULD ESCHEAT TO THE GOVERNMENT IN CASE OF A FAILURE OF HEIRS.
The right is the offspring of POLITICAL NECESSITY; AND IT IS INSEPARABLE FROM
SOVEREIGNTY, UNLESS DENIED TO IT BY ITS FUNDAMENTAL LAW. But it is no more
necessary for the exercise of the powers of a State government than for the exercise of the
conceded powers of the Federal government. THAT GOVERNMENT IS SOVEREIGN
WITHIN ITS SPHERE, AS THE STATES ARE WITHIN THEIRS. When the power to
establish post-ofÞces and to create courts within the States was conferred upon the Federal
government, included in it was authority to obtain sites for such ofÞces and for court-houses,
by such means as were known and appropriate. The right of eminent domain was one of
those means WELL KNOWN when the Constitution was adopted, and employed to obtain
lands for public uses. ITS EXISTENCE, THEREFORE, IN THE GRANTEE OF THAT
POWER OUGHT NOT TO BE QUESTIONED. THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF CONTAINS
AN IMPLIED RECOGNITION OF IT BEYOND WHAT MAY JUSTLY BE IMPLIED FROM
THE EXPRESS GRANTS. The Fifth Amendment contains a provision that "private property"
shall not "be taken for public use without just compensation." What is that but an IMPLIED
assertion that, on making just compensation, IT MAY BE TAKEN. This power of the Federal
government has not heretofore been exercised adversely; BUT THE NON-USER OF A
POWER DOES NOT DISPROVE ITS EXISTENCE. In some instances the States, by virtue of
THEIR OWN RIGHT of eminent domain, have condemned lands for the use of the general
government, and such condemnations have been sustained by their courts, without, however,
denying the right of the United States to act independently of the States... The proper view

!1134
 of the right of eminent domain seems to be that IT IS A RIGHT BELONGING TO A
SOVEREIGNTY TO TAKE PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR ITS OWN PUBLIC USES, AND
NOT FOR THOSE OF ANOTHER. Beyond that there exists no necessity; which alone is the
foundation of the right. IF THE UNITED STATES HAVE THE POWER, IT MUST BE
COMPLETE IN ITSELF. It can neither be enlarged nor diminished by a State. NOR CAN
ANY STATE PRESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICH IT MUST BE EXERCISED. THE
CONSENT OF A STATE CAN NEVER BE A CONDITION PRECEDENT TO ITS
ENJOYMENT. Such consent is needed only, if at all, for the transfer of jurisdiction and of the
right of exclusive legislation after the lands shall have been acquired. THE RIGHT
REQUIRES NO CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION. When the use is public, the necessity
or expediency of the appropriation is NOT a subject of judicial cognizance. THE POWER
MAY BE DELEGATED TO A PRIVATE CORPORATION, to be exercised in the execution of
a work in which the public is interested. Whether attached conditions have been observed is
a matter for judicial cognizance. ASCERTAINMENT OF THE AMOUNT OF
COMPENSATION TO BE MADE IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF THE POWER OF
APPROPRIATION. The constitutional provision for “just compensation” is MERELY A
LIMITATION UPON THE USE OF THE POWER. IT IS NO PART OF THE POWER ITSELF,
but a condition upon which the power may be exercised. The proceeding for the
ascertainment of the value of the property and the compensation to be made is merely an
inquisition to establish a particular fact as a preliminary to the actual taking; and it may be
prosecuted before commissioners, special boards, or the courts, WITH OR WITHOUT THE
INTERVENTION OF A JURY, AS THE LEGISLATIVE POWER MAY DESIGNATE. All that
is required is that it shall be conducted in some fair and just manner, with opportunity to
the owners of the property to present evidence as to its value, and to be heard thereon.
Whether the tribunal shall be created directly by an act of Congress, or one already established
by the States shall be adopted for the occasion, is a matter of legislative discretion. The right
over the shores and the land under the water of navigable streams resides in the State for
municipal purposes, within legitimate limitations. Land taken for one purpose cannot,
without special authority from the legislature, be appropriated, by proceedings in invitum,
to a different use. The power of eminent domain expropriates, upon indemnity for public
utility; the "police power" is exercised without making compensation — any loss occasioned
is damnum absque injuria. 2. TERRITORY OWNED AND GOVERNED; LANDS. See further
Police; Use; Public. See also Compensation, 3; Land, Public; Park, 2; Take. (WCA1889)

—=—

Now let me remind you of what an earlier, similarly feudal state looks like:

FEUDALISM - 1. A political and economic system of Europe from the 9th to 15th century,
based on THE HOLDING OF ALL LAND IN FIEF OR FEE AND THE RESULTING
RELATION OF LORD TO VASSAL and characterized by homage, legal and military service
of tenants, and forfeiture. 2. A political, economic, or social order RESEMBLING THIS
MEDIEVAL SYSTEM. (American Heritage Dictionary)

—=—


The StateÕs Þctionally granted power and authority in allodium requires faith (fealty) and belief
(love) by men in abandonment of their only True Sovereign Ñ NatureÕs God. Legal privacy as a
status of citizen is just another legal lie, for the only True privacy is under God, the All-knowing.
But what is privacy when compared to such omnipotence? Citizens require this implied contractual
relationship even at this level of private, land-holding status, for the ßattering title of such artiÞcial
(legal) status does not Exist in Nature. It is a simulation of the Real, of he who follows the Law of
Nature. In the end, when searching for these mythological sovereign men, there are none to be
found upon this earth, for no man is sovereign in and of him Self. The land is said to have
transferred from the Crown Corporation (KingÕs) lands into an allodial holding within the several
States set up underÉ what? A false god (sovereign)? A People? But there are no ÒPeopleÓ in Reality,
are there? ThatÕs just a plurality of title, a proprietary name for the new, falsely created god (body

!1135
corporate) of the totality of British and other royal-blood connected “white persons” and their
posterity. If the Crown were not absent from America’s own corporate enfranchisement, the same
bloodline inheritors would have become the private landholders, king or no king. Nothing
inherently changed in the land or even in its ßattering title, just the abolishment of feudalistic terms
of art in replacement of more romantic, patriotic sounding ones. New words were made to replace
old words, a “Babylonian name change,” as coined by researcher and author Patrick Jordan. And
this allowed the very essence of feudalism to be simply recreated into that 14th amendment United
States “public” citizen-ship under the private landholders of the feudal States.

And which god do they serve, those who have been granted patent (invention) to private, landed
estate? Why themselves, of course, for they are the constituents of “the People” (a corporation) they
pay tribute to; a legal and Þnancial trust of the parts of the whole, the blood-right of lesser kings.

PEOPLE - A STATE; as, the people of the state of New York; A NATION IN ITS
COLLECTIVE AND POLITICAL CAPACITY. (Bouv1856)

—=—

The delusion of some honorable, noble People being in control of any nation is perhaps the greatest
lie of the entire legal matrix. It was of course spoken as such by Frederick Nietzsche not long ago:

—=—

“A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also;
and this lie creepeth from its mouth: "I, THE STATE, AM THE
PEOPLE.” IT IS A LIE! Creators were they who created peoples, and
hung a FAITH AND A LOVE over them: thus they served life.
DESTROYERS, ARE THEY WHO LAY SNARES FOR MANY, AND
CALL IT THE STATE: they hang a sword and a hundred cravings over
them. WHERE THERE IS STILL A PEOPLE, THERE THE STATE IS
NOT UNDERSTOOD, BUT HATED AS THE EVIL EYE, AND AS SIN
AGAINST LAWS AND CUSTOMS.”
—Friedrich Nietzsche, from ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’

—=—
The man acting in surety under the magic spell of education public-minded person exists by
worshiping, paying tribute, and offering murderous sacriÞces of foreign ethnicities through
commercial wars to the nation, coveting above all else the product (money) of that corporation
nation, including being a part of its human capital value as gross domestic product (live-stock).

Without users of its product, its money, every nation and its idols will crumble, and they know this.
They must create United Nations to destroy all nations and raise them from the dead like the Þery
Phoenix into one United Nation, one government, one religion, one people (persons). All nations
will die in violent agony as they attempt to force their product (credit) upon its legally and
scripturally illiterate, voluntary subjects.

And so here, at the end of this Þrst Volume, I must ask not only myself but the reader of this work:

Do you really want to imagine yourself as one of “We, The People,Ò though this ßattering title of
plurality is not actually possible in Nature and thus can only ever be a self-delusional lie? Do you
really still think the People actually Exist? Will you continue to worship these artiÞcers of Þction,
these devils incorporated into their own self-proclaimed godhood?

!1136
For all the gods of the nations are idols…

Do you really strive to become like them? Can you possibly believe that a private master and
landlord is somehow any better than being a public subject in the eyes of God? Can you really
believe that you are not created Naturally Equal to all others? Perhaps a better question is, have
you Þgured out who is included in this posterity of Òthe People,Ó that American independence
from the Crown corporation(s) and the big papa (pope) is part of the big legal lie of history, and
that the bloodlines of these American landholders, politicians, actors, businessmen, and presidents
are merely the same posterity of descended heirs to the English Crown? Does this sound like
independence? Isn’t that what we supposedly fought a romantic war to escape?

—=—

ÒAnd provided further, that nothing herein contained shall affect THE
TITLES OR POSSESSIONS OF INDIVIDUALS holding or claiming under
the laws heretofore in force, OR GRANTS HERETOFORE MADE by the
late King George II, or his predecessors, or the late lords proprietors, OR
ANY OF THEM.Ó
—Declaration of Rights 1776, North Carolina Constitution, Excerpted from James Montgomery’s book “The United States is still a British Colony”

—=—

ÒBUT THIS STATE HAD NO TITLE TO THE TERRITORY PRIOR TO

THE TITLE OF THE KING OF GREAT BRITAIN AND HIS SUBJECTS,
NOR DID IT EVER CLAIM AS LORD PARAMOUNT TO THEM. THIS
STATE WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL GRANTOR TO THEM, NOR DID
THEY EVER HOLD BY ANY KIND OF TENURE UNDER THE STATE, or
owe it any allegiance or other duties to which an ESCHEAT is annexed.
How then can it be said that the lands in this case naturally result back by a
kind of reversion to this State, TO A SOURCE FROM WHENCE IT NEVER
ISSUED, AND FROM TENANTS WHO NEVER HELD UNDER IT?Ó
—MARSHALL v. LOVELESS, 1 N.C. 412 (1801), 2 S.A. 70. Excerpted from James Montgomery’s book “The United States is still a British Colony”

—=—

If your answer is yes, and you aspire to become a cheater, a vampiric, parasitic escheater, a pirate of
the legal cove and company store and corrupter of the masses of men as a false king in the
pretended god-ship of some mapped off section in the upper butt-crack of the Þctional property of
that legal matrix, then I have failed here in my sincere efforts to teach you the moral Law of God’s
Nature. For it is the accursed power of the Bible in the hands of evil and deceitfully syndicalistic
men, Its Truth and knowledge kept a mystery to all others they wished to rule over in sustained,
militarily enforced, institutionalized ignorance — this will be your scepter of authority as you reign
over the end of this age under the Open Conspiracy of the Luciferian Agenda 2030, and possibly
over the end of man’s Existence under your elected god of mammon. Welcome to your own created
hell. If your answer is no, if you seek a True and spiritual Life under Nature’s Law, then you are the
remainder, or that which the scriptural prophesies call as the remnant.

REMNANT - noun - [Contracted from remanent. See Remain.] 1. Residue; THAT WHICH IS
LEFT AFTER THE SEPARATION, REMOVAL OR DESTRUCTION OF A PART. THE
REMNANT THAT ARE LEFT OF THE CAPTIVITY. Nehemiah 1:3. 2. That which remains
after a part is done, PERFORMED, told or passed… - adjective - REMAINING; YET LEFT.
And quiet dedicate her remnant life to the just duties of a humble wife… (Webs1828)

—=—

!1137
I offer one last tidbit of knowledge here, until Volume II of this work is in its Þnished and printed
state to further solidify what we have learned thus far. For at this point the reader is at least
vaguely contemplating his or her own exodus from this legal realm back into Nature and Its God
and Law. Remember though, when one is already down the rabbit hole, one need not look down
for the entrance but up for the exit. The problem is that the entrance is the exit and we havenÕt quite
yet realized we have fallen in, for this Òevent,Ó this fall, happens at birth. So where do we look for
the solution to this conundrum? How do we escape the Þctional realm of the gods of legal persons,
places, and things when they seemingly exist all around us? How do we even begin to see the legal
matrix when its Þctions of law permeate everything we see and use through the proprietary names
(nouns) and statutory controls of evil men? How in GodÕs Name do we leave this man-made hell?

The answer is hidden within these very questionsÉ

You see, the word solution is yet another misunderstood concept used incorrectly by the corporate
world in its logos and advertisements, as solutions to man-made problems that, for the most part,
only exist in that artiÞcial realm of technology (art), Þnance, and commerce. But what happens
when we discover the actual intent and meaning of this word in law? Can the actual, Real solution
really be as easy as uncovering the deÞnition of this very legal term solution?

SOLUTIO - Latin. In civil law. Payment, satisfaction, or RELEASE; ANY SPECIES OF

DISCHARGE OF AN OBLIGATION ACCEPTED AS SATISFACTORY BY THE
CREDITOR. The term refers NOT SO MUCH TO THE COUNTING OUT OF MONEY AS
TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE OBLIGATION. (Black4)

SOLUTUS - In the civil law. Loosed; FREED FROM CONFINEMENT; SET AT LIBERTY. In
Scotch practice. PURGED. A term used in old depositions. (Black4)

SOLVER - Latin. To pay; TO COMPLY WITH ONE’S ENGAGEMENT; TO DO WHAT ONE

HAS UNDERTAKEN TO DO; TO RELEASE ONE'S SELF FROM OBLIGATION, AS BY
PAYMENT OF A DEBT. (Black4)

SOLUTION - noun - [Latin solutio, from solvo, to loosen, melt, dissolve. See Solve.] 1. The act
of SEPARATING THE PARTS OF ANY BODY; disruption; breachÉ 3. Resolution; ex-
planation; the act of explaning or removing difÞculty or doubt; as the solution of a doubt in
casuistry. 4. RELEASE; DELIVERANCE; DISCHARGE. 5. In algebra and geometry, the
answering of a question, or the resolving of a problem proposed. (Webs1828)


SOLUTION OF CONTINUITY - THE SEPARATION OF CONNECTION OF CONNECTED

SUBSTANCES OR PARTS; applied, in surgery, to a fracture, laceration, etc. (Webs1828)

SOLVE - verb transitive - solv. [Latin solvo.] 1. Properly, to loosen or separate the parts of any
thing; hence, to explain; to resolve; to eclaircise; to unfold; to clear upÉ 2. To remove; to
dissipate; as, to solve doubts. (Webs1828)

—=—

It is ironic that here, in the end, we Þnd that legal death is the desired solution for a civil life. For we
desire to kill the person (mask) while preserving the man. We must kill the strawman, severing any
possible legal, contractual attachment to its Þctional existence. We must leave its jurisdiction (place)
and stop using its beneÞts (things). We must detach our christian name from its legal (antichrist)
surname, so that our will under God is self-evidently testiÞed. We must become anonymous,
ambiguous, and therefore without legal, recognizable, proprietary form. We seek True Life after the
spiritual death (civil life) we were tricked and induced into.

But this debt is not a monetary one, as we have discussed, meaning that it cannot merely be paid
off with money. Money is just a representation of debt, of an IOU, and so its payment only passes

!1138
on that debt to another. No, our debt is a performance debt, and is a legal dis-ease. The only way to
shed a disease is to discharge that dis-eased material and state from the mind, body, and soul. Like
pus formulated around a sliver signifying the bodyÕs immune response and Þght against foreign
objects, so to must we discharge the foreign subject matter of personhood and all other legal
thoughts and temptations from our Selves. We must remove the taint by discharge what it is that is
corrupting our blood physically, mentally, and legally. Dis-ease cannot be tempted with money, it
must be forced out by discharge. In short, we must return to our Natural, negative, pre-dis-eased
state of Being, uncorrupted in our Oneness and obedience to God’s Nature and Law.

SINDERESIS - “A NATURAL POWER OF THE SOUL, set in the highest part thereof,
MOVING AND STIRRING IT TO GOOD, AND ABHORRING EVIL. AND THEREFORE
SINDERESIS NEVER SINNETH NOR ERRETH. And this sinderesis our Lord put in man,
TO THE INTENT THAT THE ORDER OF THINGS SHOULD BE OBSERVED. And
therefore sinderesis is called by some men the ‘LAW OF REASON,’ FOR IT MINISTERETH
THE PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF REASON, THAT WHICH BE IN EVERY MAN BY
NATURE, in that he is a reasonable creature.” —Doctor and Student. (Black1)

—=—

All of this brings us back to the essence of the Law of Nature, which is simply Love one’s Self. This
means keeping Pure and spotless the mind, body, and soul from all that corrupts from our Source.

—=—

“KNOW THYSELF.”
—Ancient Greek aphorism (γνῶθι σεαυτόν), and transliterated: gnōthi seauton; also (σαυτόν). One of the Delphic maxims and was inscribed in the pronaos
(forecourt) of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi according to the Greek periegetic (travelogue) writer Pausanias (10.24.1).

—=—

“He is NOT deceived who KNOWS HIMSELF to be deceived.”

—Non decipitur qui scit se decipL 5 Coke, 60. (Black1)

—=—

“IT IS LAWFUL TO REPEL FORCE BY FORCE, provided it be done

with the moderation of blameless defense, NOT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF TAKING REVENGE, BUT TO WARD OFF INJURY.”
ÑVim vi repellere licet, modo ßat moderamine inculpatae tutelse, non ad sumendam vindictam, sed ad propulsandam injuriam. (Black4)

—=—

Citizenship is injury, as voluntary agency. And one that knows himself to be in fraud cannot ever
claim that fraud is done on him through that voluntary injury. There is no tort for injury when one
agrees to the Untied States code as their doctrine of law, for it is the right under Title 42, Section
1981 again to be put in pain, punished, taxed, and extorted (exacted) from. And because we
voluntarily accept these rights as part of our injury into personhood, we agree to stand as the
unavoidable surety to that legal persona and the protections is pretends to be subjected to the
obligations created by those assigned equal rights of persons, the right to equal sanctions
(punishments) by the gods of the nations and their mercenary agents (dementors) in uni-form.

As we are at the end of the Þrst Volume of this work, I would like to kindly thank the reader once
again for not shooting the messenger. You were warned that the Truth is often painful, and ever

!1139
more so to he who hangs on to the deceits and lies (legal truths) of the Þction entwined within this
artiÞcial, legal realm and its false, ßattering titles.

Like the way of the Dinosaur, the story of the strawman, the Þctional persona must go extinct
before man as a species with no foreseeable apex (summit) to his pointless industrial and techno-
logical progress towards a modern tower of babel and of bellial (wickedness) kills itself by killing
its Natural habitat. The breath of artiÞcial life must be severed by solution (discharge), by the end of
all contracts and thus all contracted legal dis-ease, the artiÞcial life extinguished from every legal
persona of every legal entity and corporation for man to be Naturally Free from his own bonded
surety (strawman) to tyranny. The legal lie must die so that the Real may once again be realized
and Self-actuated beyond and in spite of these mere symbols and simulations of it. This process of
awakening from the dead to Eternal Life so that we may Live for and protect Ever (Jehovah) is the
only savior of man, and perhaps in these dangerous days, of all Life on earth entrusted in dominion
to man as its caretaker. We must grow up and stop suckling the teat of artiÞcial devices and hiding
within artiÞcial wombs (legal matrixes). We must become One with Everything and be Everything
with the One.

But Þrst we must voluntarily allow the artiÞcial construct of false life and useless intelligence and
information to die. We must be born again into our True Selves, embracing the Natural, embedded
knowledge of the God-given gift of sinderesis, recognizing it as not merely the Love of Self but the
True Love of the Self as part of the Oneness and Harmony of All self-Existence. We cannot know
our True Self while pretending to be some thing we are not. And without such spiritual knowledge
and Love of Self, it is impossible to Love all others as One, for all men have been retroÞtted from
birth with a false, legal id-entity. It is this artiÞcial life, this strawman, that every man must dis-
charge (stop breathing power into) and purge. The life of the puppet cannot exist without a willing
masterÕs breath, and the strings of that master cannot be pulled by any principal if the principleÕs
puppet (property) is destroyed. To cut the strings of legal law, we must cut the strings to our
puppet (person). But the law of the puppet (persons) only recognizes one solution, one alternative
to the artiÞce it has constructed to hold us in this legal matrix Ñ the return of christ (GodÕs Word/
Law) to each man.

In the end, if all of legal Þction and language were to be destroyed, we must realize that nothing in
Nature, nothing in Reality, and therefore no man would actually be harmed. The rabbit would
carry on in its ambiguous substance as if the word rabbit never Þctionally existed. And the Law of
Nature would be untouched, for Its True, self-Existence never required anything of man, no names
or titles, and certainly no language arts. I clarify this here because we must acknowledge that only
a collective forgiveness of all Þctions, of all debts and all crimes against Nature invoked by those
currently hiding behind such legal persons and titles Ñ only total forgiveness of all men may cause
the death of all persons so that all men may Live and actually become absolutely responsible of
oneÕs present actions. Only then may the artiÞce no longer be used as an excuse to sin (syn), and
only then will the power of such legal deceits done in false persona have nowhere to hide, instead
being Lovingly, reasonably, and Lawfully fought off by the force of the guardians of the Truth of
Jehovah (self-Existence). Until respect of Þction is extinguished from the minds of men, those men
playing as Þctional characters will incorporate into artiÞcial persons (conspiracies) and run
together in corruption, piracy, and crimes against all of Nature. The spiritual, moral, Highest Law
of GodÕs Nature must become the only Law, where Þction and lies are recognized as the deadly sins
that were once, in a strange time long ago, protected by legal word magic.

But Þrst, so much death must happen!

Ñ=Ñ

“In the same manner that a thing is bound it is unloosed.”

“A partnership is moreover DISSOLVED by the DEATH of a partner.”

!1140
 “Death is called the ‘LAST PUNISHMENT,’ the ‘extremity of
punishment.’”

“DEATH DISSOLVES ALL THINGS.”

—SOLVITUR EO LIGAMINE QUO LIGATUR. Livingston v. Lynch, 4 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 582. (Black4)
—SOLVITUR ADHUC SOCIETAS ETIAM MORTE SOCII. Inst. 3, 26, 5; Dig. 17, 2. (Black4)

—Mors dicitur ultimum supplicium. 3 Inst. 212. (Black4)
—Mors omnia solvit. Jenk. Cent. p. 160, case 2. (Applied to the case of the death of a party to an action.) (Black4)

—=—

How may I express here, as the Bible does, that death is a good thing when it comes to legal
persons, places, and things (names)? Consider, perhaps, that when one is unplugged from The
Matrix simulation in that science Þction story, does not one for all intents and purposes merely
return to Reality, to oneÕs True Self in Nature? Does not the Þctional representation and projected
self-image of false persona (mask) therein digitally dissolve (die) and loose its artiÞcial life?

How can one be dead in recognition of one’s attached legal name and Live only under one’s
christian name and Its Law? How can we shed ourselves of this legal persona, this strawman, when
our Lives have been repurposed towards that vessel of commerce and its success in the legal,
commercial matrix?

The beautiful Truth is that none of this actually exists. Nonetheless, we must know what it is that
causes us to be stuck in this hell of non-Existence as if itÕs Real. We must Þrst recognize the source
of this legal debtor’s hell and what is perpetuating its eternal dam-nation before we can escape it.

PERPETUATE - TO CAUSE TO ENDURE INDEFINITELY TO PRESERVE FROM THE

CONTINGENCY OF LOSS OR EXTINCTION. (WCA1889)

PERPETRATOR - See Accomplice. May include AN ARTIFICIAL PERSON, as, a, railroad

company.” (WCA1889)

PERPETUAL - Unlimited in time; continuous: as, a perpetualÑinjunction, lease, statute,

succession, qq. v. A grant of perpetual succession to a corporation DOES NOT MEAN THAT
THE CORPORATE EXISTENCE SHALL BE UNENDING, BUT ONLY UNBROKEN
DURING THE TERM. Compare Permanent. See STATE. (WCA1889)

—=—

It was Thomas Jefferson that is noted for stating, "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful
slavery.”

Insurance is the unnatural, “peaceful” legal admixture of surname is a perpetual (term/time-

based) contract of surety that ends only at the death of that which is insured. And what is True,
Natural Freedom if not the very lack of such insurance and perpetuities and their perpetuators?

Neither myself nor “God” nor the many authors of the Bible wish for you to die in Real Life, I
assure you, only that you should stop your current necromancy with the Þctions of manÕs legal,
always dead creations. It is the mind that must be reclaimed, the Natural Reasoning (sinderesis) and
the Natural Right to use Its moral guidance in all areas of True Existence, of Life in and under
Jehovah and Its Law. In the ultimate of metaphorical hurdles, we must embrace death so that we
may Live again. We must die in order to establish Heaven in this Life and for our future
generations. We must obtain spiritual Life after this legally spiritual death, or continue being
perpetually tricked into waiting for what the corporate church tells us will be the return of christ as

!1141
 deity. Of course, all of the Þctional 13 gods of the zodiac are considered as the returning gods in
their procession of the ages, and Pisces (the stars anthropomorphized as Þsh in a Yin-Yang position
to each other) is no exception, even as Age of Aquarius the water-bearer returns in the year 2597, an
astrological age returning after its full procession. But the return of the Son (Law/Word) can only
really be achieved when we manifest christ in our Lives, in our actions and works, when we follow
the Son (Law). But in this perpetual hell, when you actually, physically die, you will in that Þnal
breath know that these pirates of church and state have stolen the right of blood inheritance from
you and your legally (bloodlessly) issued children so that everything you worked for in this dead,
legal life reverts in escheat to the state (property holder), where it may beneÞcently allow your
bastard offspring to acquire that stuff in legalized will for a small fee, say a 50% estate and orphan
tax that will require your children to sell half the non-inheritable, legally willed estate to pay for it.

Note the difference here between Truth and legal Þction and ask yourself, which state of Being
would you Þght to protect and die for? Which word form below, Real or legal, do you desire to be
your Reality? Which Law do you seek? (Terms ÔIn Nature’ and ÔIn legal ÞctionÕ added by author.)

BENEVOLENCE - (In Nature) The doing of a kind or helpful action towards another,
UNDER NO OBLIGATION EXCEPT AN ETHICAL ONE. (Black4)

BENEVOLENCE - (In legal Þction) In public law. Nominally a VOLUNTARY GRATUITY

GIVEN BY SUBJECTS TO THEIR KING, BUT IN REALITY A TAX OR FORCED LOAN.
(Black4)

—=—

We have learned that the Law (Son, Word) of God is of and for this Life and Nature of Existence, of
this eternal Being. But as long as such corporations (artiÞcial persons) of men in syndicalist
combination (conspiracy) against GodÕs Law and Nature stand as false gods over our ability to self-
govern and Reason in Nature, the longer we will remain in the debtorÕs hell these institutions of
man have created to enslave us. As in The Matrix simulation, we must unplug, discharge, and be
ambiguous in civil death to its pretended existence. We must become extinct as to our legal presence
and public state of mind. And as it turns out, christÕs example is the only path out of here that that
legal realm actually respects. ChristÕs example, as the spiritual path voluntarily bound under the
Natural Law of God, is the only True Remedy, the only True Redemption, and the only True
Shepherd. For what becomes extinct in the legal realm becomes Free and Pure in GodÕs Realm.

But once out, once unplugged and discharged, once we have made ourselves Living and thus
unrecognizable (unable to be legally summoned), once we have exorcized this legal demon of false
id-entity in third person-hood under contractual agency with these master devils, we must never
return to that artful realm. We must never be tempted by its artiÞcers, trickeries, and insurances.
For we may only be actors in and receive beneÞts from the legal matrix if we plug back in Ñ if we
abandon Jehovah and Its Nature and Law yet again to accept the mark of legal id-entity in devilry.



No, we must remain spiritually Living, while killing the strawman, causing the civil death of that
civil life in attainder. Once extinct, once our blood is uncorrupted and our Lives made Pure under
the Law, we can never return to such a tainted, artiÞcial life. We can exist no more in the artiÞce.

MORS - Latin. Death. (Black4)

DEATH - Cessation of life; EXTINCTION OF POLITICAL EXISTENCE. See Life. (WCA1889)


MORTISES - Latin. Dead. See Caput, Mortuum. (Black4)




MORTUUS EST - He is dead — a return to process. (Black4)


ATTAINDER - Staining; corrupting; pollution of blood; EXTINGUISHMENT OF
INHERITABLE QUALITY OF BLOOD. WHEN SENTENCE OF DEATH IS PRONOUNCED
THE IMMEDIATE, INSEPARABLE CONSEQUENCE AT COMMON LAW IS ATTAINDER:

!1142
the condemned is without the protection of the law, HIS ESTATES ARE FORFEITED, HIS
BLOOD CORRUPTED. 3 The word is derived from attiricta; the stain or corruption of a
criminal capitally condemned. THE PARTY ATTAINTED LOST ALL INHERITABLE
QUALITY — HE COULD NEITHER RECEIVE NOR TRANSMIT PROPERTY OR OTHER
RIGHTS INHERITANCE. (WCA1889)

MORT CIVILE - In French law. CIVIL DEATH, as upon conviction for felony. It was
nominally abolished by a law of the 31st of May, 1854, but something very similar to it, in
effect at least, STILL REMAINS. Thus, the property of the condemned, possessed by him at
the date of his conviction, goes and belongs to his successors, (heritiers,) as in case of an
intestacy; AND HIS FUTURE ACQUIRED PROPERTY GOES TO THE STATE BY RIGHT
OF ITS PREROGATIVE, (par droit de desherence,) BUT THE STATE MAY, AS A MATTER OF
GRACE, make it over in whole or in part TO THE WIDOW AND CHILDREN. (Black4)

CIVILITER MORTUUS - CIVILLY DEAD; DEAD IN THE VIEW OF THE LAW. The
condition of ONE WHO HAS LOST HIS CIVIL RIGHTS AND CAPACITIES, AND IS
ACCOUNTED DEAD IN LAW. (Black4)

MORTAL - DESTRUCTIVE TO LIFE; CAUSING OR OCCASIONING DEATH; EXPOSING

TO OR DESERVING DEATH, ESPECIALLY SPIRITUAL DEATH; deadly; fatal; as, a mortal
wound, OR MORTAL SIN; of or pertaining to time of death. (Black4)

IN FULL LIFE - CONTINUING IN BOTH PHYSICAL AND CIVIL EXISTENCE; that is,
neither actually dead nor civiliter mortuus. (Black4)

EXTINCTION OF A THING - When a thing which is THE SUBJECT OF A CONTRACT has

been destroyed, THE CONTRACT IS OF COURSE RESCINDED AS… as IT IS
IMPOSSIBLE TO DELIVER A THING WHICH IS NOT IN ESSE… When the subject of the
contract is an individual, and not generally one of a species, the contract may be rescinded;
when it is one of a species which has been destroyed, then, it may still be completed, and it
will be enforced. (Black4)

IN ESSE - IN BEING. ACTUALLY EXISTING. Distinguished from in posse, which means

"that which is not, but may be." A child before birth is in posse; after birth, in esse. (Black4)

EXTINGUISHMENT - Contracts. THE DESTRUCTION OF A RIGHT OR CONTRACT -

THE ACT BY WHICH A CONTRACT IS MADE VOID. 2. ART EXTINGUISHMENT may
be by matter of fact and by matter of law. 1. It is by matter of fact either express, as when one
receives satisfaction and full payment of a debt, AND THE CREDITOR RELEASES THE
DEBTOR; or implied, as when a person hath a yearly rent out of lands, and becomes owner
either by descent or purchase, of the estate subject to the payment of the rent, the latter is
extinguished; but the person must have as high an estate in the land as in the rent, or the
rent will not be extinct. See Merger… Vide Discharge of a Debt. (WCA1889)

EXTINGUISHMENT - Whenever a right, title or interest is DESTROYED OR TAKEN

AWAY BY THE ACT OF GOD, operation of law, or act of the party. (WCA1889)

EXECUTION - noun - PERFORMANCE; the act of completing or accomplishing… 1. In law,

the carrying into effect a sentence or judgment of court; the last act of the law in completing
the process by which justice is to be done, by which the possession of land or debt,
damages or cost, is obtained, OR BY WHICH JUDICIAL PUNISHMENT IS INFLICTED. 2.
THE INSTRUMENT, warrant or ofÞcial order, by which an ofÞcer is empowered to carry a
judgment into effect. An execution ISSUES from the clerk of a court, and is levied by a
sheriff, his deputy or a constable, ON THE ESTATE, GOODS OR BODY OF THE DEBTOR.
3. THE ACT OF SIGNING AND SEALING A LEGAL INSTRUMENT, or giving it the forms
required to render it a valid act; as the execution of a deed. 4. The last act of the law in the

!1143
punishment of criminals; CAPITAL PUNISHMENT; DEATH INFLICTED ACCORDING
TO THE FORMS OF LAW. 5. Effect; something done or accomplished. Every shot did
execution. 6. Destruction; slaughter… 7. Performance, as in music or other ART. (Webs1828)
EXECUTE - verb transitive - [Latin exequor, for exsequor; ex and sequor, to follow. See Seek.] 1.
Literally, to follow out or through. Hence, TO PERFORM; to do; to effect; to carry into
complete effect; to complete; to Þnish. We execute a purpose, A PLAN, DESIGN OR
SCHEME; we execute a work UNDERTAKEN, that is, we pursue it to the end. 2. To perform;
to inßict; as, to execute judgment or vengeance. 3. To CARRY into effect; as, to execute law
or justice. 4. To carry into effect the law, or the judgment or sentence on a person; to inßict
capital punishment on; TO PUT TO DEATH; as, to execute a traitor. 5. To KILL. 6. TO
COMPLETE, AS A LEGAL INSTRUMENT; TO PERFORM WHAT IS REQUIRED TO GIVE
VALIDITY TO A WRITING, AS BY SIGNING and sealing; as, to execute a deed or lease. -
verb intransitive - TO PERFORM the proper ofÞce; TO PRODUCE AN EFFECT. (Webs1828)

EXECUTIONER - noun - One who executes; ONE WHO CARRIES INTO EFFECT A
JUDGMENT OF DEATH; one who inßicts a capital punishment in pursuance of a legal
warrant… 2. THE INSTRUMENT BY WHICH ANY THING IS PERFORMED. (Webs1828)

EXECUTED - participle passive - Done; PERFORMED; ACCOMPLISHED; CARRIED INTO

EFFECT; PUT TO DEATH. (Webs1828)

DESTROY - As used in policies of insurance, leases, and in maritime law, and under various
statutes, this term is often applied to AN ACT WHICH RENDERS THE SUBJECT USELESS
FOR ITS INTENDED PURPOSE, THOUGH IT DOES NOT LITERALLY DEMOLISH OR
ANNIHILATE IT. To "destroy" a VESSEL within the meaning of an act of congress means
TO UNFIT THE VESSEL FOR SERVICE, BEYOND THE HOPE OF RECOVERY BY
ORDINARY MEANS… In relation to WILLS, CONTRACTS, and other documents, the term
"destroy" does not import the annihilation of the instrument or its resolution into other
forms of matter, BUT A DESTRUCTION OF ITS LEGAL EFFICACY, which may be by
cancellation, obliterating, tearing into fragments, etc. (Black4)

DISCHARGE - As a verb and noun, conveys the idea of RELIEVING OF A CHARGE,

BURDEN, WEIGHT, OR OF A DUTY, SERVICE, OR RESPONSIBILITY. -verb -(1) TO
EMPTY OF CARGO OR FREIGHT: AS, TO DISCHARGE A VESSEL; also, TO REMOVE
THAT WITH WHICH A THING IS LADEN: as, to discharge a cargo. See Dispatch ; Poet, Of
discharge. (3) TO EXTINGUISH, SATISFY: as, TO DISCHARGE a demand, DEBT, legacy,
lien, JUDGMENT, incumbrance, OBLIGATION, qq. v. (3) To free from the payment of
indebtedness already incurred: as, to discharge a bankrupt, an insolvent, qq. v. (4) To absolve'
from contingent pecuniary hability (ability): as, TO DISCHARGE AN INDORSER, A
SURETY, A GUARANTOR, qq. v. (5) TO RELIEVE FROM THE PERFORMANCE OF THE
DUTIES OF A TRUST: as, to discharge an assignee, administrator, executor, guardian,
receiver, qq. v. (6) TO RELIEVE FROM FURTHER SERVICE in the consideration of a cause;
to dismiss: as, to discharge a jury. (7) To set at liberty; to free from imprisonment: as, to
discharge a prisoner, a convict. (8) To decline further to entertain a proceeding; to vacate: as,
to discharge a rule. - noun -. (1) RELIEF FROM SOME BURDEN OR DUTY:
EXTINGUISHMENT OR SATISFACTION OF AN OBLIGATION; EXONERATION FROM
RESPONSIBILITY, ACCOUNTABILITY, LIABILITY ; EXEMPTION FROM SERVICE OR
ACTION; LIBERATION; ANNULMENT… (WCA1889)

QUIT - TO ABANDON, RELINQUISH, SURRENDER. TO QUIT A SERVICE IS TO

ABANDON IT, not to leave it expecting to return the next day… (WCA1889)

QUITCLAIM - verb - TO GIVE UP ONE’S CLAIM OF TITLE. - noun - A DEED in the nature
of A RELEASE, containing words of RESCUE and of GRANT… (WCA1889)

QUIETARE - L. Latin. TO QUIT, ACQUIT, DISCHARGE, or SAVE harmless… (Black4)

!1144
 QUIETE CLAMANTIA - L. Latin. In old English law. QUITCLAIM. (Black4)

QUIETE CLAMMER - L. Latin. TO QUITCLAIM OR RENOUNCE ALL PRETENSIONS OF

RIGHT AND TITLE. (Black4)

QUIETUS - In old English law. Quit; acquitted; DISCHARGED. A word used by the clerk of
the pipe and auditors IN THE EXCHEQUER, in their acquittances or DISCHARGES GIVEN
TO ACCOUNTANTS… In modern law. A FINAL DISCHARGE OR ACQUITTANCE, AS
FROM A DEBT OR OBLIGATION; THAT WHICH SILENCES CLAIMS. (Black4)

—=—

Only in death may the beauty, Grace, and innocence of Life in God’s True Nature be found again.

Debt may not be paid off. One cannot pay a debt with more debt (money as IOU’s). A positive, in
other words, cannot be discharged with another positive. Only a negative may cancel out a
positive. More to the point, becoming again only a negative, ambiguous Being under God’s Law
cancels out anything in man’s positive law by extinguishing the bond and surety as a performance
debt and obligation under such contract. We must quit playing the game; quit acting the fools.

—=—

“WHEN THE SUBJECT [OR SUBSTANCE] IS EXTINGUISHED, THE

INCIDENT [OR ADJUNCT (AGENCY)] CEASES. Thus, when the
business for which a partnership has been formed is completed, or
brought to an end, THE PARTNERSHIP ITSELF CEASES.”
—EXTINCTO SUBJECTO, TOLLITUR ADJUNCTUM. (Black4)

—=—

It is said that a man should strive to Live a simple Life. But how do we know what it is to be in the
state of being simple when for our whole, Þctionally driven lives we’ve been attached and bonded
to all of the complications, competitiveness, immoralities, and sureties of this legal matrix code
under the temptations of mammon? Just what does it actually mean, in Reality, to Live a simple
Life? And how does that apply to the Law, to a contractual disposition and obligation, and to the
respect of persons and usury? In the simplest of terms, the word simple merely means to Live Life
in Nature without need or use of Þction, without surname, and without any signature! It means
self-responsibility and self-governance. It is the way, the spiritual path of the True sons of God…

SIMPLE - PURE; UNMIXED; NOT COMPOUNDED; NOT AGGRAVATED; NOT

EVIDENCED BY SEALED WRITING OR RECORD. (Black4)

—=—

What can I say here at the end of this Þrst Volume to offer you comfort and good will in your
journey that is not already written as the Word of God, whether you choose to accept this pre-
fabricated fate and course in the devil’s hell for debtors or seek to discharge that which burdens
you down in lading to it? Well, after much consideration, I suppose the only thing I can say is this:

—=—

“BE YE NOT UNEQUALLY YOKED TOGETHER WITH

UNBELIEVERS: for what fellowship hath righteousness with
unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? AND

!1145
WHAT CONCORD HATH CHRIST WITH BELIAL? or what part hath
he that believeth with an inÞdel? AND WHAT AGREEMENT HATH
THE TEMPLE OF GOD WITH IDOLS? FOR YE ARE THE TEMPLE OF
THE LIVING GOD; as God hath said, I WILL DWELL IN THEM, AND
WALK IN THEM; and I will be their God, AND THEY SHALL BE MY
PEOPLE. Wherefore COME OUT FROM AMONG THEM, AND BE YE
SEPARATE, saith the Lord, AND TOUCH NOT THE UNCLEAN
THING; and I will receive you, AND WILL BE A FATHER UNTO YOU,
AND YE SHALL BE MY SONS AND DAUGHTERS, saith the Lord
Almighty.Ó


—2 Corinthians 6: 14-18, KJB

—=—

ÒSo then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into
heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.Ó
—Mark 16:19, KJB

—=—

ÒIf ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above,
where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.Ó
—Colossians 33:1, KJB

—=—

Volume Two of this work will serve to solidify and verify in triplicate what has been disclosed
herein, breaking down further these language arts and other barriers to knowledge. The legal
matrix will be broken down to its coded terms of art, while compared extensively with the movie
version of this debtor’s performance hell, including a look at the actual, stunningly intense and
eyeopening books that were utilized and downright plagiarized without due credit in that Þlm
franchise. And the Truth is so much stranger than any Hollywood Þction made in simulation of It.

As for this Þrst Volume, I can only say this: may the death of your ego, and thus the end of your
vain belief in (love of) a legal, strawman id-entity, lead you onto the Right and spiritual path taken
from you at your birth and de-livery into the bond and surety of this debtorÕs hell. If it so moves
you and, in christ (Law), should you now choose to Þnd the path to Live Truly within NatureÕs
Realm and thus under the Right Hand of God, may the death of the state’s strawman be painless
and honorable, its detachment without mental scar, that it may lead to a Truly untainted,
unblemished, and spiritually Pure new Life. There is no other True redemption, for all else is of the
god of mammon, of the path of magic and trickery, and each man may only serve one master. May
we all be spiritually guided and motivated to Þnd each other out there in and as the remainder! In
the Purest Harmony of Love and Charity of all Life and self-Existence as the Oneness of God…

—Clint



— Insert Volume II here —


!1146